Significant Pleadings And Briefs

The following pleadings and briefs are representative of the legal positions taken by the U.S. Trustee Program and the Department of Justice in areas that relate to new or novel issues under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 or long-standing areas of concern to the Program. This Web page will be updated as needed.
Date Subject Description Format
  Continued Charitable Contributions:
October 2, 2006 In re Tranmer, 06-60353013 (Bankr. D. Mont.) Brief filed in support of the debtors' deduction of monthly charitable contributions, to the extent the contributions are otherwise allowable, from current monthly income in calculating disposable income under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(2). [PDF - 85 KB]
  Debt Relief Agencies (DRAs):
June 30, 2006 CBA v. USA, 3:06CV729, (D. Conn) Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss - First, the plaintiffs contend that the prohibition against a consumer debtor with limited assets to “incur more debt in contemplation of such [debtor] filing” for bankruptcy, 11 U.S.C. § 526(a)(4),violates the attorney plaintiffs’ First Amendment right, the client plaintiffs’ First and Fifth Amendment rights, and the separation of powers principle. Second, they contend that the requirement that a debt relief agency provide certain written disclosures to such consumer debtors, 11 U.S.C. § 527, violates the First Amendment. Third, plaintiffs contend that the requirement that a debt relief agency insert a written disclosure in advertisements for bankruptcy assistance, 11 U.S.C. § (a)(3)-(4), violates the First Amendment. Fourth, they challenge the requirement that a debt relief agency execute a written contract describing the services to be provided and the fees for such service, 11 U.S.C. § 528(a)(1)-(2). Finally, plaintiffs claim that the professional standards imposed on debt relief agencies violate their due process rights. Based on these claims, they seek a preliminary injunction enjoining defendants from enforcing Sections 526, 527 and 528 against the plaintiffs, the members of their organization, and others similarly situated. These allegations fail to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Accordingly, their complaint should be dismissed and their request for a preliminary injunction denied. [PDF - 1.7 MB]
February 2006 In re Attorneys at Law and Debt Relief Agencies, No. 4:05-CV-00206 (S.D. Ga.) Addresses the procedural infirmity of the case, i.e., absence of a case or controversy which results in a lack of jurisdiction, as well as a substantive response to the issue of whether attorneys are DRAs. [PDF - 60 KB]
January 9, 2006 In re Geisenberger, No. 2:05-CV-5460-JS (E.D. Pa.) Requests the court to dismiss a complaint filed by a Pennsylvania attorney that challenges sections 227 through 229 of the BAPCPA (codified at 11 U.S.C. §§ 526-528) on constitutional grounds. [PDF - 151 KB]
Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissing the Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of standing. (June 19, 2006) [PDF - 80 KB]
February 2006 In re Moore, No. 04-24651, (Bankr. W.D. Wa.) Addresses the debtor’s lack of standing to assert an action on behalf of the attorney, as well as constitutional issues and the substantive issue of whether attorneys are DRAs. [PDF - 86 KB]
February 2006 In re Refco, Inc., et al., No. 05-60006 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) Addresses the right of the U.S. Trustee to exercise independence in making trustee appointment decisions. [PDF - 104 KB]
Updated May 8, 2015

Was this page helpful?

Was this page helpful?
Yes No