Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

I should add that divisible interests in CP are also relevant in the distribution of decedents estates.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green, Attorneys at Law
1010 E. Union St. Suite 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: (626) 449-8433
Fax: (626) 449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Holly;
Your reasoning is correct. In CA it is 541(a)(2)(B) and FC 910(a) that bring all the CP into the BK estate. 541(a)(2)(A) is irrelevant in CA.
Using the term the debtors interest in CP is a concept that does not exist in bk or in debtor-creditor law. It is only applicable in division of marital property. The use of the term indicates the speaker does not understand the law and it only creates confusion.
I did a CLE on this topic a number of years ago. Maybe it is time for another.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green, Attorneys at Law
1010 E. Union St. Suite 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: (626) 449-8433
Fax: (626) 449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

That's what I thought but I think this is largely misunderstood. I have
been hearing from other attorneys that it's only the "debtor's interest in
the CP." This has confused me! Perhaps we could have an MCLE on this?
Section 541 says
a) The commencement of a case under section 301
, 302
, or 303
of this title creates an
estate. Such estate is comprised of all the following property, wherever
located and by whomever held:
(1) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c)(2) of this section, all
legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the
commencement of the case.
(2) All interests of the debtor* and the debtors spouse in community
property* as of the commencement of the case* that is *
*(A) under the sole, equal, or joint management and control of the debtor;
or *
* (B) liable for an allowable claim against the debtor, or for both an
allowable claim against the debtor and an allowable claim against the
debtors spouse, to the extent that such interest is so liable.*
Here, the medical practice is not under the sole, equal, or joint
management and control of the Debtor, but Family Code section 910 says (a)
Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, the community estate is
liable for a debt incurred by either spouse before or during marriage,
regardless of which spouse has the management and control of the property
and regardless of whether one or both spouses are parties to the debt or to
a judgment for the debt.
So, if the community is liable for her debts, and the medical practice is
CP, then Tee can sell 100%. I guess the issue would then be whether her
debts are the type for which the CP would be liable.
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com
**primary email
address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California
Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600
F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
**For a quicker response, email me at holly@roarklawoffices.com

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

100% of cp is property of estate. Trustee sells 100%. All proceeds not exempted goes to creditors.
Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503 310-328-1001-voice
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:46 PM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> The likelihood of Trustee finding a buyer for Debtor's nondebtor spouse's medical practice is slim because by law he would have to sell the stock to another doctor, and it's a highly specialized practice servicing elderly people in a Vietnamese speaking community, so probably it would be worthwhile to just turn over the stock to the trustee and say "go ahead".
>
> As a practical matter, would trustee sell ALL the stock or just 1/2 because (even though all the community property is property of the estate), nondebtor spouse should still be able to be paid his share of the CP. I assume Trustee would sell 100% of the stock and pay nondebtor Spouse his CP share because otherwise, to sell just 1/2 would be essentially forcing the doctors into some kind of partnership.
>
> If trustee managed to sell the medical practice, does that mean the buyer takes over the whole office? What if the landlord doesn't want him there? And the patients are not going to stay with that new doctor. This is why such a sale seems remote. And the patients can follow the doctor to his new office.
>
> Can someone please explain how such a sale actually looks in real life?
>
>
> Holly Roark
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
> and Sports Lawyer
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
> www.roarklawoffices.com
> Central District of California
> Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600
> Los Angeles, CA 90067
> T (310) 553-2600
> F (310) 553-2601
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
> **For a quicker response, email me at holly@roarklawoffices.com.
> I only use gmail for my listservs, and am likely to miss private emails
> directed to my gmail account.**
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

charset="UTF-8"
Holly:
All of the CP is property of the estate. There is no such thing as a spouses share. That is for JT property.
As we do not know the ins and outs of the variety of businesses our clients are engaged in, I always have a long talk with client about the potential buyers and the market price of the business. What would they buy the business for? Would the doc be concerned about losing the patients if s/he bought the business? Would the buyer automatically be put in the networks from which the doctors patients come?
You could also talk one of the trustees on our listserv about the likelihood of a trustee being able to sell this business and what the barriers are?
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green
Attorney at Law
Fitzgerald & Green, Attorneys at Law
1010 E. Union St. Suite 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: (626) 449-8433
Fax: (626) 449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

The likelihood of Trustee finding a buyer for Debtor's nondebtor spouse's
medical practice is slim because by law he would have to sell the stock to
another doctor, and it's a highly specialized practice servicing elderly
people in a Vietnamese speaking community, so probably it would be
worthwhile to just turn over the stock to the trustee and say "go ahead".
As a practical matter, would trustee sell ALL the stock or just 1/2 because
(even though all the community property is property of the estate),
nondebtor spouse should still be able to be paid his share of the CP. I
assume Trustee would sell 100% of the stock and pay nondebtor Spouse his CP
share because otherwise, to sell just 1/2 would be essentially forcing the
doctors into some kind of partnership.
If trustee managed to sell the medical practice, does that mean the buyer
takes over the whole office? What if the landlord doesn't want him there?
And the patients are not going to stay with that new doctor. This is why
such a sale seems remote. And the patients can follow the doctor to his
new office.
Can someone please explain how such a sale actually looks in real life?
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California
Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600
F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
**For a quicker response, email me at holly@roarklawoffices.com.
I only use gmail for my listservs, and am likely to miss private emails
directed to my gmail account.**
The likelihood of Trustee finding a buyer for Debtor's nondebtor spouse's medical practice is slim because by law he would have to sell the stock to another doctor, and it's a highly specialized practice servicing elderly people in a Vietnamese speaking community, so probably it would be worthwhile to just turn over the stock to the trustee and say "go ahead". As a practical matter, would trustee sell ALL the stock or just 1/2 because (even though all the community property is property of the estate), nondebtor spouse should still be able to be paid his share of the CP. I assume Trustee would sell 100% of the stock and pay nondebtor Spouse
his CP share because otherwise, to sell just 1/2 would be essentially
forcing the doctors into some kind of partnership.If trustee managed to sell the medical practice, does that mean the buyer takes over the whole office? What if the landlord doesn't want him there? And the patients are not going to stay with that new doctor. This is why such a sale seems remote. And the patients can follow the doctor to his new office.Can someone please explain how such a sale actually looks in real life? Holly RoarkCertified Bankruptcy Specialist*and Sports Lawyer
holly@roarklawoffices.com**primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California
Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600
F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal
Specialization
The post was migrated from Yahoo.