In re Carr

3 Citing cases

  1. In re Falcone

    370 B.R. 462 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2007)   Cited 6 times
    Adopting the reasoning of In re Tomco, 339 B.R. 145 (W.D. Pa. 2006), and concluding that § 109(h) is nonjurisdictional

    The vast majority of cases that have considered whether to grant a debtor a continuance to obtain credit counseling even though the debtor has failed to certify an attempt to obtain such counseling pre-petition, have ruled against the debtor for failure to comply with § 109(h)(3)(A)(ii). See Clippard v. Bass, 2007 WL 913929, at * 4 (W.D. Tenn March 13, 2007); In re Duplessis, 2007 WL 118945, at *3 (Bankr. D. Mass. January 11, 2007); In reMcBride, 354 B.R. 95, 99 (Bankr. D. S.C. 2006); In re Wilson, 346 B.R. 59, 62 (Bankr. N.D. N.Y. 2006) (denying motion for exigent circumstances as debtors made no attempt to seek counseling pre-petition); In re Carr, 344 B.R. 774, 775 (Bankr. N.D. W.Va. 2006) (notwithstanding exigent circumstances, extension not warranted where no attempt to seek counseling pre-petition); In re Latovljevic, 343 B.R. 817, 822 (Bankr. N.D. W.Va. 2006); In re Carey, 341 B.R. 798, 802-03 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2006); In re Raymond, 2006 WL 1047033 (Bankr. D. N.H. April 12, 2006) (finding filer not entitled to exemption or extension as no representation about credit counseling); In re Givhan, 2006 WL 4451481, at *1 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. March 23, 2006) (ruling certification insufficient as failed to allege a request for counseling); In re Dansby, 340 B.R. 564, 568 (Bankr. D. S.C. 2006); In re Tomco, 339 B.R. 145 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2006); In re Ross, 338 B.R. 134, 135 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2006); In re Childs, 335 B.R. 623, 630 (Bankr. D. Md. 2005); In re Cleaver, 333 B.R. 430, 435 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2005); In re Gee, 332 B.R. 602, 604 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2005); In re Watson, 332 B.R. 740, 745-6 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2005). The Debtor is correct that when interpreting 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)

  2. In Matter of Stanton

    CASE NO. 07-30063 HCD (Bankr. N.D. Ind. Mar. 12, 2007)

    Complete waiver of the credit counseling requirement is granted only in the extreme circumstances listed in § 109(h)(4) — incapacity, disability, or active military duty in a military combat zone. See In re Carr, 344 B.R. 774, 775-76 (Bankr. N.D.W.Va. 2006). A debtor's incarceration has been determined to be an insufficient circumstance to qualify for a complete waiver of the requirement.

  3. In re Carr

    344 B.R. 776 (Bankr. N.D.W. Va. 2006)   Cited 14 times
    Looking at why "the prior case" was dismissed, what has changed in the time between the dismissal "of the prior case" and the commencement of the current case, and the degree of prejudice suffered by creditors due to the lapse of time between the dismissal "of the prior case" and the filing of the current case

    The court, however, dismissed that case because the Debtor had failed to meet the eligibility requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 109(h) inasmuch as he had failed to obtain pre-petition, non-profit, approved, budget and credit counseling services. See In re Carr, No. 06-189 (Bankr. N.D.W. Va. May 3, 2006). After filing his March 20, 2006 bankruptcy petition, the Debtor obtained the requisite credit counseling services in compliance with 11 U.S.C. § 109(h).