Bankruptcy

In re: Nussbaum — Study Notes

915 F.3d 1248 (10th Cir. 2023)

Study notes for In re: Nussbaum: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

Post-petition income from new employment must be included in a Chapter 13 repayment plan as it represents a substantial and unforeseen change in financial circumstances.
Professor Notes

This case emphasizes the dynamic nature of a debtor's financial circumstances post-petition, particularly in the context of Chapter 13 bankruptcy. The Tenth Circuit recognized that income from new employment can significantly affect the debtor's ability to repay debts, distinguishing it as a 'substantial and unforeseen change' warranting plan modification. Therefore, students should focus on how bankruptcy plans can be adjusted in response to fluctuations in income, particularly in exceptional economic climates like those precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additionally, the case illustrates the need for clarity in what constitutes 'disposable income' and how debtors should be encouraged to actively report and adjust their repayment plans to reflect their true financial situation. A professor may highlight the potential implications for both debtors and creditors, considering how unexpected income might influence settlements and negotiations in bankruptcy proceedings.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1What were the key financial circumstances that led to Nussbaum's bankruptcy filing?
  2. 2How did the court define 'disposable income' in relation to post-petition employment?
  3. 3What were the implications of the economic downturn on the court’s interpretation of Nussbaum's income?
  4. 4Can you explain the criteria for modifying a Chapter 13 repayment plan?
  5. 5Why did the Tenth Circuit deem Nussbaum's new employment income as 'substantial and unforeseen'?
  6. 6What precedent did the Tenth Circuit consider in reaching its decision?
  7. 7How does this case impact future Chapter 13 cases involving significant post-petition changes?
Mnemonic Device

NEW INCOME = PLAN ADJUSTMENT (indicating that new income requires a modification to the bankruptcy plan)

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
In re: HargisIn Hargis, the court did not find sufficient grounds for plan modification since existing income levels were stable and had not changed unexpectedly.
In re: DwyerDwyer involved an increase in income due to other predictable sources, while Nussbaum’s income from new employment was deemed unforeseeable.
In re: BrownBrown ruled that changes due to voluntary employment did not require modifications, contrasting with Nussbaum’s situation where her re-employment was not an anticipated change.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Including post-petition income promotes fairness and increases the likelihood of successful repayment plans, ensuring that debtors contribute adequately based on their actual financial situations.

Against the Rule

Requiring modification of plans might impose a burden on debtors who could face administrative hurdles or unwanted scrutiny regarding their income status.

Class Discussion Points
  • The impact of economic fluctuations on bankruptcy filings and repayment structures.
  • How courts can balance debtor protection with creditor rights when faced with new financial information.
  • The role of unemployment benefits in determining disposable income in Chapter 13 cases.
  • Potential repercussions for debtors who fail to report significant changes to their financial circumstances post-petition.
  • The legal standard for what constitutes a 'substantial and unforeseen' change in a debtor's financial situation.
Exam Angle

This case may appear on exams as a discussion of modifications to Chapter 13 plans and the criteria for including post-petition income in bankruptcy repayment calculations, particularly in light of unforeseen employment changes.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.