After the bar date to file a complaint objecting to the discharge of a debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(c) had passed, First Union National Bank moved for an extension of time within which to file a complaint. It argued that it was entitled to rely upon the court telephone attendant's interpretation of an Order extending the time to object to debtor's discharge that the Order applied to dischargeability actions as well. The motion for extension of time was denied. The court found that the creditor's attorney's reliance upon an unauthorized statement made by a deputy clerk was unreasonable and no basis for granting the relief sought.

The court issued an order staying an adversary proceeding wherein the debtor sought to avoid as a preference garnishment payments made within ninety (90) days of the filing of her case, in order to await the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Stine v NationsBank, No. 00-2352, involving the same issue. That court has certified a question of law to the Court of Appeals of Maryland.

A Chapter 13 debtor sought to avoid a judgment lien that attached to his interest as a tenant-in-common of a parcel of real property eight days before the filing of his bankruptcy case. Defendant did not respond, and a default was entered. HELD: because the debtor had equity in the real property in an amount nearly five times the amount of the judgment, his avoidance power was limited to the amount of exemption left to him, that is, $1,039.00, rather than avoidance of the entire judgment.

Plaintiff sought to except from Defendant’s Chapter 7 discharge, pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
§ 523(a)(5), certain obligations arising from the parties’ Separation Agreement that was incorporated into a Judgment of Absolute Divorce. At issue was Defendant’s obligation to share equally in costs associated with their two minor children’s attendance at private school and related attorney fees. Defendant asserted that the obligations are not reasonable and were not intended as alimony, maintenance, or support.

After confirmation of his Chapter 13 Plan, Debtor moved to convert his case to a case under Chapter 11. HELD: § 1307(d) of the Bankruptcy Code compels a negative inference that after a Chapter 13 debtor’s plan has been confirmed, the bankruptcy case may not be converted to a case under Chapter 11.

After the filing of a bankruptcy case under Chapter 7, a lender secured by Debtor's automobile learned that the vehicle was to be sold to satisfy an alleged mechanic’s lien. The lender notified the mechanic that consummation of the sale was barred by the stay of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a). The mechanic went forward with the foreclosure, purchased the vehicle for a sum less than was owed to the secured creditor, and thereupon sold the vehicle. HELD: A secured creditor may recover actual and punitive damages sustained on account of a willful violation of the automatic stay by a third party.
Restated Opinion docketed November 15, 2004

The Debtors objected to the proof of claim filed on behalf of Mrs. Trobaugh's former husband. The claim was based upon both unpaid child support, that Debtors did not object to, and payments to be used for the education of a child of the parties who was no long a minor. HELD: the rule of decision applicable in matters involving priority claims filed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 507(b) is identical to that applied to cases under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). Where the parties by agreement intended future payments to function as support for their children, unpaid payments are entitled to priority under 11 U.S.C. § 507(b).

Debtor and Citifinancial, Inc., a secured creditor, entered into a Reaffirmation Agreement whereby Debtor reaffirmed an obligation secured by a lien on her 1994 Mercury Sable automobile to repay $11,753.42 to the creditor, together with interest at an undisclosed rate. Because the Debtor was not represented by an attorney during the course of negotiating the Agreement, the court held a hearing pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524(d). HELD: An agreement to reaffirm a debt in the sum of $11,753.42 secured by an automobile that had a value between $590.00 and $1,050.00 could not be found to be in the best interests of the Debtor under 11 U.S.C. § 524(c)(6)(A).