In Re Flores - [1 Attachment]

Post Reply
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


Great job Nancy!
Law Office of Peter M. Lively * Personal Financial Law Center I
11268 Washington Boulevard, Suite 203, Culver City, California 90230-4647
Telephone: (310) 391-2400* Toll Free: (800) 307-3328 * Fax: (310) 391-2462
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com; nacba-rs@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 2:55 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] In Re Flores - [1 Attachment]
[Attachment(s) from Erik Clark included below]
In this case, argued by Nancy Clark on behalf of the Debtors, the 9th Cir Court of Appeals upholds the part of Kagenveama which states that an above median debtor with negative DMI does not have to file a 5-year plan.
Rod Danielsons office argued that because the Supreme Court in Lanning overruled Kagenveama the debtors must file a 5 year plan. The 9th Circuit Disagreed.
Needless to say, this is a victory for debtors in general and we are very proud of Nancy for the work she put into this successful result.
M. Erik Clark
100 N. Barranca Avenue, Suite 250
West Covina, CA 91791
www.blclaw.com
Office: (626) 332-8600
Fax: (626) 332-8644
Board Certified in Consumer Bankruptcy
American Board of Certification

The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


Thank you Nancy Clark for your hard work on behalf of our Debtors in the
9th Circuit!
Congratulations!
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Erik Clark wrote:
> **
>
> [Attachment(s) from Erik Clark included
> below]
>
> In this case, argued by Nancy Clark on behalf of the Debtors, the 9th Cir
> Court of Appeals upholds the part of Kagenveama which states that an above
> median debtor with negative DMI does not have to file a 5-year plan. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Rod Danielsons office argued that because the Supreme Court in Lanning
> overruled Kagenveama the debtors must file a 5 year plan. The 9thCircuit Disagreed.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Needless to say, this is a victory for debtors in general and we are very
> proud of Nancy for the work she put into this successful result.****
>
> ** **
>
> M. Erik Clark
> [image: BCLogoSmall]
> 100 N. Barranca Avenue, Suite 250
> West Covina, CA 91791****
>
> www.blclaw.com
> Office: (626) 332-8600
> Fax: (626) 332-8644
> Board Certified in Consumer Bankruptcy
> American Board of Certification****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
Christine A. Wilton, Esq.
Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
*Office:*
5150 Candlewood Street, Suite 17F
Lakewood, CA 90712
*Mailing:*
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
Lakewood, CA 90712
Office: 877-631-2220
Cell: 562-824-7563
Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
Web: www.attorneychristine.com
Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
***************************
Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
Thank you Nancy Clark for your hard work on behalf of our Debtors in the 9th Circuit!Congratulations!On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Erik Clark <eclark@blclaw.com> wrote:
[Attachment(s) from Erik Clark included below]
In this case, argued by Nancy Clark on behalf of the Debtors, the 9th Cir Court of Appeals upholds the part of Kagenveama which states that an above median debtor with negative DMI does not have to file a 5-year plan.
Rod Danielsons office argued that because the Supreme Court in Lanning overruled Kagenveama the debtors must file a 5 year plan. The 9th Circuit Disagreed.
Needless to say, this is a victory for debtors in general and we are very proud of Nancy for the work she put into this successful result.
M. Erik Clark
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


Once again, Brava to Nancy and to your firm.
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California
Board of Legal Specialization
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
means at

The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


BRAVO ! Nice job.
**
*
*
*FIRM NEWS: August 2012*
*
*
*8/31/12: rkllaw congratulates Robert Kevin Lee on his recent
certification with the nationally recognized American Board of
Certification in Business Bankruptcy. Mr. Lee is now certified by both the
State Bar of California and American Board of Certification.*
rkllaw.com
*888.777.0839*
*
*
*CERTIFICATIONS*
State: State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization [Bankruptcy]
National: American Board of Certification [Business Bankruptcy]
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Erik Clark wrote:
> **
>
> [Attachment(s) from Erik Clark included
> below]
>
> In this case, argued by Nancy Clark on behalf of the Debtors, the 9th Cir
> Court of Appeals upholds the part of Kagenveama which states that an above
> median debtor with negative DMI does not have to file a 5-year plan. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Rod Danielsons office argued that because the Supreme Court in Lanning
> overruled Kagenveama the debtors must file a 5 year plan. The 9thCircuit Disagreed.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Needless to say, this is a victory for debtors in general and we are very
> proud of Nancy for the work she put into this successful result.****
>
> ** **
>
> M. Erik Clark
> [image: BCLogoSmall]
> 100 N. Barranca Avenue, Suite 250
> West Covina, CA 91791****
>
> www.blclaw.com
> Office: (626) 332-8600
> Fax: (626) 332-8644
> Board Certified in Consumer Bankruptcy
> American Board of Certification****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
BRAVO ! Nice job.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


Dear Erik and Nancy,
Bravo. I have recently had a couple of above-media, negative Form 22C DMI debtors, and this holding is good news indeed. Nancy, thank you for your hard work.
Nick
Nicholas Gebelt, Ph.D., J.D.
Board Certified Bankruptcy Specialist
[Description: cid:image003.jpg@01CC076B.B14D73C0]
Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt
15150 Hornell Street
Whittier, CA 90604
Phone: 562.777.9159
FAX: 562.946.1365
Email: ngebelt@goodbye2debt.com; ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com
Web: www.goodbye2debt.com
Blog: www.southerncaliforniabankruptcylawblog.com/
We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
Confidentiality Note: This e-mail is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately at 562.777.9159 or e-mail info@gebeltlaw.com and destroy the original message and all copies.
Representation Note: If you have not signed a contract of representation, the Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt do not represent you, and this email does not contain any legal advice for you.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with the requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Post Reply