<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; U.S. Bankruptcy Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/us-bankruptcy-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 10:09:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Jurisdiction &#8211; Chapter 11&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-jurisdiction-chapter-11/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-jurisdiction-chapter-11/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58366</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court held that Fannie Mae’s contention that it will vote against the confirmation of the amended plan is not a sufficient ground for the Court to deny approval of the amended disclosure statement for such plan; however, the debtor is required to supplement the amended disclosure statement in the manner set [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-jurisdiction-chapter-11/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Bankruptcy Code §§ 362(d) (2) and (3)&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-bankruptcy-code-%c2%a7%c2%a7-362d-2-and-3/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-bankruptcy-code-%c2%a7%c2%a7-362d-2-and-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:15:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58364</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Roanoke U. S. Bankruptcy Court grants a motion for relief from automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)(2) by conditioning the continuance thereof upon the debtor obtaining confirmation of its amended plan by July 15, 2010. The debtor initiated filed a Chapter 11 voluntary petition, representing its business as “Single Asset Real Estate” as defined [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-bankruptcy-code-%c2%a7%c2%a7-362d-2-and-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-5/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:13:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William E. Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58362</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Lynchburg U.S. Bankruptcy Court denied the motion by the U.S. Trustee to dismiss debtor&#8217;s Chapter 7 petition for abuse because, even though it was undisputed that the debts were consumer debts, the debtors’ means test disposable income is negative. The United States trustee brings this motion on the grounds that it would be an [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-4/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William E. Anderson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Lynchburg U.S. Bankruptcy Court denied the motion by the U.S. Trustee to dismiss debtor&#8217;s Chapter 7 petition for abuse because, although the debts were clearly consumer debts, the debtor&#8217;s net monthly income did not exceed the threshold amount as determined by the Means Test.. This court has jurisdiction over this matter. 28 U.S.C. §§ [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Reaffirmation Agreements&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-reaffirmation-agreements/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-reaffirmation-agreements/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court denied a motion for approval of a reaffirmation agreement regarding a Jeep Grand Cherokee between debtors and Citifinancial Auto Corporation, as the debtors were represented by counsel at the time of signing but counsel was unwilling to sign the certification form even though the debtors wished to reaffirm. The motion [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-reaffirmation-agreements/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-3/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court denied the debtor’s Third Amended Plan of Reorganization (“Amended Plan”) and Motion to Confirm Plan Notwithstanding Balloting “Cramdown” (“Motion to Confirm”) where one class of impaired creditors did not accept the plan and the discrimination to general unsecured creditors was not [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-2/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court denied the debtors request that they avoid a restitutionary transaction deciding to wait until resolution of the adversary proceeding, given the overlap of existing issues, before considering the viability or mootness of creditor&#8217;s remaining objections to confirmation. Opposing the debtors&#8217; request to avoid a restitutionary transaction is creditor Grundy National [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debtor &#8211; Automatic Stay&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debtor-automatic-stay/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debtor-automatic-stay/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:03:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58351</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following a hearing, the Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court granted the debtor&#8217;s motion to hold the creditor in contempt for violation of the automatic stay under 362 (k) where the court found that the creditor had engaged in egregious conduct against the debtor including threatening him outside after a creditors&#8217; meeting, placing signs in the debtor&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debtor-automatic-stay/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy – Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-%e2%80%93-debt/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-%e2%80%93-debt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:02:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58349</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court, in a Memorandum Decision, concluded that its responsibilities and authority with respect to approval of reaffirmation agreements are limited to those situations where (i) bankruptcy debtors are not represented by counsel in the bankruptcy case, or (ii) they are represented by counsel in cases where a presumption of undue hardship [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-%e2%80%93-debt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Debt&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William F. Stone Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Bankruptcy Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law, while there was clearly a sufficient basis for the court to deny the motion to convert a Chapter 13 bankruptcy to a Chapter 11, the Roanoke U.S. Bankruptcy Court granted the debtors motion to convert Chapter 11 bankruptcy because it concluded that the collective interests of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/11/bankruptcy-debt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
