Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

The portion of the premium that is "rooted in the pre-bankruptcy past" is part of the estate. Firmly take the position that 90% of the premium is not property of the estate and then try to settle. It is a factual battle that will take both sides a lot of time to prove in court if the trustee is determined to get it all or most of it all. I'm not sure your client is right. Lots of people have life insurance that they just pay and pay (like me). If its auto insurance, your guy is selling new policies that would not be property of the estate. JH
>
> Hello Everyone:
>
> A client, who owns an insurance agency, filed for ch 7 bk. The client's business basically consists of what's called a "book of business" where the client spends 8-9 hours every day calling the existing clients to explain the services and to make sure the clients are happy. Otherwise, they could swith to another agency. At a recent 341 hearing in WH, the trustee asked the client about the number of policies in existence in 2008 that were renewed in 2009. The client gave an approximate figure and based on that the trustee is now stating that the 2010 renewals for any policy existing on the date of filing are part of the bk estate. I reviewed the code defining "property of the estate" and subsection (6) states that the property of estate includes "Proceeds, product, offspring, rents, or profits of or from property of the estate, except such as are earnings from services performed by an individual debtor after the commencement of the case." The client is
> stating that in order for 90% of the exisitng policies to be renewed, he needs to "service" each policy by calling the clients every day, explaining different products, offering better terms, and doing everything to keep them happy and to ensure another renewal. Unless, I'm misreading the code section, I want to let the trustee know that because the client needs to spent his time and labor on most of these policies to ensure renewals, the renewals should NOT be considered part of bk estate per language of subsection 6 (is this correct??). Did anyone have a similar experience or know how to handle it? I need to provide the information to trustee by next week. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Sofya Davtyan
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, March 7, 2010 12:07:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Questions for the Clerks March 20 Meeting
>
>
> Andrew,
> Despite the general tone of your email, you offer several helpful suggestions, so thank you for that.
>
> IMO, I'm sure almost all questions can probably be answered through independent research. Sometimes, though it's nice to be able to ask a question to the group and get a substantive response. Isn't that one of the purposes of this listserv? This reminds me of a joke, something to the effect of "everyone that drives slower than me are idiots and everyone that drives faster is a crazy nut."
>
> Maybe there needs to be a separate listserv for newbies and advanced practitioners. In the meantime, though, how about you filter to trash emails that contain "newbie" in the subject heading as well as emails from known newbies? That way, you may be able to avoid getting upset on a Sunday morning and avoid the risk of offending us newbies by calling us opportunistic and lazy.
>
> Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
> Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
> 1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
> Los Angeles, CA 90017
> Tel: (213) 252-4440
> Fax: (213) 738-1116
> Email: jacobchang.esq@ gmail.com
>
> Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
> Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Andrew Goodman wrote:
>
>
> >With all due respect, the clerks have so much work to do and so many pleadings to process they really have NO time to mentor or teach young or lazy (no offense) lawyers who are eithernew to bankruptcy, want to become bankruptcy lawyers because of the "nature of the times".The court with the assistance of theBar went through more than a year ago and re-wrote the Local Bankruptcy Rules and created a CourtManual. The CDCBAA put pon a GREAT programin January 2009 explaining the changes in the Rules. When I was a younger bk lawyer, if I didn'tunderstand how to file or obtain a hearing date, IREAD the Local Rulesor perhaps asked my secretary or a more seasoned lawyer.If you want to make some enemies, call thejudges clerk and askthem how todogency motions, if you go to the website/information /judges name, each> procedures for emergency motions, etc.
> >
> >This is not "ROCKET SURGERY" (and yes, I knowexactly what I wrote). Read the rules, do your homework or find a mentor - but leave the clerks of the court alone. They are underpaid/overworke d, very nice peoplewho don'tneed to be harassed by lawyerstoo lazy to do their job.r 25 years, during a time when there was NO internet and everything was hand filed, with extra copies that had to be tabbed and blue-backed, I think the attorneys working in the bankruptcy community today have it incredibly EASY.
> >
> >Andrew Goodman
> >GOODMAN FAITH
> >21650 Oxnard Street, Suite 500
> >Woodland Hills, CA. 91367
> >818-827-9250
> >818-932-3684- fax
> >agoodman@goodmanfai th.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ________________________________
> >To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups. com
> >
> >Sent: Tue, March 2, 2010 3:00:13 PM
> >Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Questions for the Clerks March 20 Meeting
> >
> >
> >Great points all around, Christine!
> >
> >As much as I've looked, though I could have easily missed something, I haven't been able to find the step-by-step action guide for bankruptcy practice, especially within the context of a motion or AP practice. It seems these are trade secrets passed down from mentor to mentee.
> >
> >If there is something like this, please point us in the right direction.> >
> >Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
> >Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
> >1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
> >Los Angeles, CA 90017
> >Tel: (213) 252-4440
> >Fax: (213) 738-1116
> >Email: jacobchang.esq@ gmail.com
> >
> >Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> >
> >Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Christine Wilton wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hello Esteemed Board and Colleagues:
> >>
> >>I would like to pose the following questions to our upcoming panel of Clerks:
> >>
> >>1. Step by step Motions; from filing, calendaring, serving notice, etc. Please cite the rules and where I can find the answers and in what order these steps should be accomplished. [just a handout is all I need really]
> >>
> >>2. Is there some Clerk's Outline? Can we get an inside look at the Clerk's training manual?
> >>
> >>3. Can we have a Clerk's Hotline for our generally basic questions before we attempt tasks on our own?
> >>
> >>4. Can I volunteer to be a clerk for a day and follow them around? Kind of like a ride-along with a cop.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>--
> >>Christine A. Wilton
> >>Principal Attorney
> >>Greifendorff Law Offices
> >>4067 Hardwick Street, #319
> >>Lakewood, CA 90712
> >>Toll Free: 877-207-6013
> >>Cell: 562-824-7563
> >>Fax: 562-804-4028
> >>Email: attorneychristine@ gmail.com
> >>Web: www.greifenlaw. com
> >>Blog: www.losangelesbankr uptcylawmonitor. com
> >>
> >>************ ********* ******
> >>This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are private and confidential and are solely for the use of the addressee. It may contain material which is legally privileged. If you are not the addressee or the person responsible for delivering to the addressee, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use of it is strictly prohibited.
> >>
> >
> >
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.