The Bankruptcy Law Firm, PC

Add to Favorites

Bankruptcy Law Attorneys, Adoption Law Attorneys, Appellate Practice Attorneys

Be the first to review!

CLOSED NOW

Tomorrow: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm

22 Years

in Business

Accredited

Business

(310) 559-9224Call Visit WebsiteVisit Website Map & DirectionsDirections10524 W Pico Blvd Ste 212Los Angeles, CA 90064 Write a ReviewWrite Review

Is this your business?

Customize this page.

Claim This Business

Hours

Regular Hours

Mon - Fri:	9:00 am - 5:00 pm

Places Near Los Angeles with Bankruptcy Law Attorneys

Culver City (3 miles)
Beverly Hills (4 miles)
Santa Monica (7 miles)
West Hollywood (7 miles)
Marina Del Rey (8 miles)
Inglewood (11 miles)
Studio City (12 miles)
Sherman Oaks (12 miles)
El Segundo (14 miles)
North Hollywood (15 miles)
Encino (15 miles)

More Info

General Info

The Bankruptcy Law Firm, PC represents individuals and small businesses in bankruptcy proceedings. Our bankruptcy firm represents clients within all Southern California counties that fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, and handles matters pertaining to both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Email

BBB Rating

Extra Phones

Phone: (310) 559-9881

Phone: (310) 559-9133

TollFree: (866) 259-2889

TollFree: (800) 747-3161

Payment method

amex, cash, debit, discover, master card, visa

Neighborhoods

Westside, West Los Angeles

AKA

Kathleen P March Bankruptcy

Bankruptcy Law Firm K March Attorney

Other Links

http://www.bkylawfirm.com

https://www.bkylawfirm.com

Categories

GalleryView all (1)

Gallery Image Number 1

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (310) 559-9224

Address: 10524 W Pico Blvd Ste 212, Los Angeles, CA 90064

Website: http://www.bkylawfirm.com

People Also Viewed

View similar Bankruptcy Law Attorneys

Suggest an Edit

The Bankruptcy Law Firm, PC

Divorce
Child Support
(5) Similarly, the child support provisions in the Social Security Act are not subject to the automatic stay, including both...
Child Custody and Visitation
Adoption
Spousal Support
"Ride through" option restored for vehicles (no more repos for failure to reaffirm). Homes protected from trustees selling them due to post-petition appreciation where had been fully protected by the homestead exemption on the petition date. Such appreciation will also be exempt. Spouses living separate or apart from a non-filing spouse will no longer require a waiver from the non-filing spouse to utilize our alternate set of exemptions (which are usually more favorable for non-homeowners). Increases the motor vehicle exemption to $7,500 for both sets of exemptions. Creates new exemption fully exempting vehicles converted for use by a disabled debtor, spouse or dependent. Creates new exemption for up to an aggregate amount up to $7,500 for accrued or unused vacation pay, sick leave, family leave or wages. Creates new exemption for payments from settlement agreements arising from debtor's employment (e.g. workplace harassment). Creates new exemption for alimony, maintenance and support which was not previously included in the set of exemptions which includes the homestead exemption.
Annulment
This time, the San Francisco-based appeals court upheld the constitutionality of a Nevada statute giving superpriority status to the lien of a homeowners’ association for unpaid assessments. Last week, we saw the Ninth Circuit rule that a subordinate mortgage lender did not have appellate standing to challenge the bankruptcy court’s annulment of the automatic stay in favor of an HOA, even when it meant that an HOA’s small lien wiped out a $1.4 million mortgage. To read ABI’s report on

Criminal Defense
In re Golan, BR (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Dec. 19, 2019), E.D.N.Y case #19-75598: Bankruptcy Court decision holds that it did not violate the bankruptcy automatic stay for the state court to hold a contempt hearing, in a divorce suit, after the debtor filed bankruptcy, because the bankruptcy debtor failed to pay a $20,000 sanction to wife’s attorney, in divorce suit, which the state court had ordered the bankruptcy debtor to pay to wife’s divorce attorney. There was no stay violation for the state court to hold the contempt hearing, because the contempt hearing was criminal contempt, and 11 USC 362(b)(1) stay exception excepts criminal matters from being stayed by the bankruptcy automatic stay. The outcome of the criminal contempt hearing was that the state court ordered the bankruptcy debtor put in jail, until the bankruptcy debtor paid the $20,000 to the wife’s divorce attorney. The Bankruptcy Court held that putting the debtor in jail as punishment for criminal contempt would not have been a stay violation, due to the same 11 USC 362(b)(1) stay exception for criminal matters. However, the Bankruptcy Court held that putting debtor in jail, to try to coerce debtor into paying $20,000 to the wife’s divorce attorney, did violate the bankruptcy automatic stay, because that was a prepetition debt, and it was unclear whether the state court order was seeking to have that debt paid from bankruptcy estate funds, or from postpetition earnings of debtor. Because divorce “domestic support payments” are automatically nondischargeable, pursuant to 11 USC 523(a)(5), it would not have been a stay violation to seek to collect the $20,000 form debtor’s postpetition earnings.
Wrongful Death
Telles. Rather, a creditor filed a wrongful death suit against the debtor, not knowing the debtor had filed a chapter 13 petition eight months earlier.
Traffic Violations
Rudy J. Cerone agreed. He told ABI that Justice Alito reached “the correct result under the history and structure of sections 362(a) and 542.” He noted that the ABI Consumer Commission recommended speeding up turnover proceedings. Mr. Cerone is a partner with McGlinchey Stafford PLLC in New Orleans.
Fraud
What’s the bottom line here?: You can still abuse your ex-spouse by discharging the property division (so long as it wasn’t a secured debt) in Chapter 13, if you can confirm and perform a Ch 13 plan; but you can no longer use Chapter 13 to discharge debts for fraud, conversion, embezzlement, breach of fiduciary duty, or wilful and malicious acts that injured or killed someone, or tax fraud/evasion.
Theft
Embezzlement
Answer: The creditor must timely file an adversary proceeding for nondischargeability of the debt in question, in the debtor’s bankruptcy case, within 60 days after the date first set for the debtor’s “341a” meeting (meeting of creditors) in the bankruptcy case. A nondischargeability adversary proceeding, to try to keep a debt from being discharged, in the debtor’s bankruptcy case, because the debt arose from the debtor committing fraud, embezzlement, breach of fiduciary duty, or from debtor committing a wilful and malicious act against the creditor, is brought pursuant to 11 USC 523(a)(2), (4) or (6). “Click” on the adversary proceeding “button” on the list in the left hand side of the front page of this website, to read more about adversary proceedings, which are lawsuits filed in bankruptcy cases. Unless a creditor has legal training, the creditor will need to immediately hire a competent bankruptcy attorney, to prepare, timely file and litigate a nondischargeability adversary proceeding, with the creditor as plaintiff, against the debtor, in the debtor’s bankruptcy case, or the debt will be discharged, if the debtor receives a discharge in the debtor’s bankruptcy case.
Identity Theft
Mr. Avenatti went to trial in a separate criminal case in New York beginning on January 24. The jury found him guilty of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in a verdict on February 4.
Restraining Order
Note: The New Law does not differentiate between proceedings for restraining orders and civil actions for damages. Expect litigation about this ambiguity.
Forgery
In re Cowen, F.3d, 2017 Westlaw 745596 (10th Cir. 2017): The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held in Cowen that when two creditors "passively retained" the debtor's property, that they did not violate the automatic stay by "passively retaining" debtor's property (which they had possession of at the time debtor filed bankruptcy), because the creditors did NOT engage in any affirmative acts to "control" the debtor's property. However, the creditors' post-petition forgery and perjury did violate the stay.
Money Laundering

Business and Corporate Law

Business Disputes
Rather than decide whether a contract is executory under the dueling “Countryman” and “functional” definitions of executoriness, this writer instead recommends adoption of the “Modern Contract Analysis” proposed by Prof. Jay L. Westbrook and Kelsi S. White in “ The Demystification of Contracts in Bankruptcy,” 91 Am. Bankr. L.J. 481 (Summer 2017). Prof. Westbrook occupies the Benno C. Schmidt Chair of Business Law at the University of Texas School of Law.
Business Transactions
The counterargument, as articulated by Judge Kozinski, is that it would interfere with the foreclosure process, a creature of state law, to expose lenders to federal liability under the FDCPA. That is true, but I think that argument is overbroad. Many commercial transactions are governed by state law, often with a federal overlay, so that the creditor must comply with both sets of laws. That is the nature of federalism. See, e.g., Arizona v. United States, ---U.S. ----, 132 S.Ct. 2492, 2500, 183 L.Ed.2d 351 (2012): "Federalism, central to the constitutional design, adopts the principle that both the National and State Governments have elements of sovereignty the other is bound to respect."
Trade Secrets
Intellectual Property
Unfair Competition
Oskoui vs. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A, F3d, 2017 WL 957206 (9th Cir. 2017): Ninth Circuit holds that when a lender encouraged a borrower to make thousands of dollars in payments in pursuit of an unavailable mortgage modification program, the lender engaged in deceptive practices in violation of the California Unfair Competition Law.

Employment Discrimination
Twenty one months after filing an employment discrimination suit in federal district court against her former employer, U.S. Steel, Sandra Slater filed for bankruptcy. (The original case was filed under chapter 7 and later converted to chapter 13). She failed to list the pending federal case in her bankruptcy schedules. U.S. Steel then moved the district court to bar the discrimination suit based on the doctrine of judicial estoppel. The district court granted the motion and Ms. Slater appealed.

Construction Litigation
Before filing their chapter 7 bankruptcy case on June 21, 2004, Larry and Nancy Tevis ("Tevises") were entrenched in three legal battles. First, Tevises had initiated state court construction defect litigation regarding a modular home they had purchased with a loan from the State of California Department of Veteran Affairs ("Cal Vet"), secured by Tevises' real property (the "Modular Home Litigation"). After the state court approved a $65,000 settlement that Mr. Tevis agreed to in open court, Tevises later reneged and refused to sign the settlement. The state court granted an order enforcing the settlement order over Tevises' objections, and later dismissed the case. Second, Tevises initiated a malpractice suit against the attorneys who represented them in the Modular Home Litigation, who then filed attorney's liens against the settlement proceeds from the Modular Home Litigation (the "Malpractice Litigation"). Third, Cal Vet initiated an unlawful detainer action against Tevises after they defaulted on their loan.
Eminent Domain
Under the facts of this case, the only "legal or equitable proceeding" that I can imagine that would have "compelled" the beneficiary to accept a money satisfaction would have been an eminent domain proceeding. Is that what Congress had in mind: a hypothetical condemnation, deus ex machina? If that is true, isn't every interest in real property subject to compensable extinguishment?
Landlord-Tenant Disputes
Other cases are complicated by the length of the pandemic and conflicting accounts of landlord and tenant. And they often leave both parties feeling shortchanged.

Immigration Law

Citizenship and Naturalization
Green Cards

Personal Injury
Even if you receive a general discharge, some particular debts are not discharged under the law. Therefore, you may still be responsible for most taxes and student loans; debts incurred to pay nondischargeable taxes; domestic support and property settlement obligations; most fines, penalties, forfeitures, and criminal restitution obligations; certain debts which are not properly listed in your bankruptcy papers; and debts for death or personal injury caused by operating a motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft while intoxicated from alcohol or drugs. Also, if a creditor can prove that a debt arose from fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or theft, or from a willful and malicious injury, the bankruptcy court may determine that the debt is not discharged.
Medical Malpractice
Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57 (1998), the Supreme Court, dealing with Section 523(a)(6)'s exception to discharge for "willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another" in the context of a medical malpractice case, held that non-dischargeability required a deliberate or intentional injury. Finally, in
Social Security Disability
Federal law allows student borrowers with TPDs to seek forgiveness of their federal student loans on the grounds that they would not be able to make enough to pay them off. Those with TPDs may receive Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), meaning the SSA would likely have the necessary information to determine if they qualify for student loan forgiveness.

Trusts and Estates

Power of Attorney
Official Forms 411A and 411B. The use of Official Forms is mandatory. The Bankruptcy Rules do not require the use of Director's Forms; their use is optional unless local court rule or general order mandates their use. At its September meeting, the Judicial Conference approved reissuing the bankruptcy general and special power of attorney forms, currently Director's Forms 4011A and 4011B, as Official Forms 411A and 411B to conform to Bankruptcy Rule 9010(c), which requires execution of a power of attorney on an Official Form. Bankruptcy cases commenced after December 1, 2018, must use the new forms. Cases pending on December 1 must use the new forms "insofar as just and practicable."
Probate

Bankruptcy
We are OPEN for business, in person, at the offices of The Bankruptcy Law Firm, PC. We also are equipped to conduct business remotely. Read more.
Foreclosure
If the bankruptcy debtor does not timely file Opposition to a secured creditor’s relief from stay motion that moves for an order allowing the secured creditor to sell the debtor’s house or other real property in a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, the result is that the debtor usually loses the debtor’s house or other real property, in a nonjudicial foreclosure sale carried out by the creditor, because unopposed Motions very often get granted by the bankruptcy court. Similarly, where a secured creditor moves for relief from stay to repossess the debtor’s vehicle, if the debtor fails to file a timely Opposition to the motion, the result is usually that the debtor loses the vehicle, because the secured creditor repossesses and sells the vehicle, because unopposed Motions very often get granted.
Tax Law
The California tax law does not permit the state taxing authority to prepare a return. “[U]nder the plain words of the relevant statutes, the return exception contained in § 523(a)’s hanging paragraph does not apply,” Judge Thomas said.
Debt Collection
Last week, the CFPB published additional frequently asked questions on Regulation F, its debt collection rule. The new FAQs address third-party communications, electronic communications, and unusual or inconvenient time and place provisions.

View All Services

Provided by