In Re Eader

426 B.R. 164, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 910
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland
DecidedMarch 22, 2010
Docket19-12087
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 426 B.R. 164 (In Re Eader) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Eader, 426 B.R. 164, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 910 (Md. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

DUNCAN W. KEIR, District Judge.

Debtors filed a petition for chapter 7 bankruptcy protection on November 20, 2009. Mazda American Credit (“Lessor”) filed a Motion for Approval of the Lease Agreement Between Debtors and Mazda American Credit on January 22, 2010 [Docket # 20], Under the Lease Assumption Agreement the Debtors agree to assume personal liability for the lease of a 2008 Mazda CX9 truck in consideration of their waiver of the protections afforded under Section 524(a) of the Bankruptcy Code 1 .

Prior to passage of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), a chapter 7 debtor could not assume a lease prior to discharge as Section 365(a) conferred the power to assume executory contracts on the trustee, subject to approval by the bankruptcy court. BAPCPA amended the Bankruptcy Code to provide:

(A) If the debtor in a case under chapter 7 is an individual, the debtor may notify the creditor in writing that the debtor desires to assume the lease. Upon being so notified, the creditor may, at its option, notify the debtor that it is willing to have the lease assumed by the debtor and may condition such assumption on cure of any outstanding default on terms set by the contract.
(B) If, not later than 30 days after notice is provided under subparagraph (A), *165 the debtor notifies the lessor in writing that the lease is assumed, the liability under the lease will be assumed by the debtor and not by the estate.

11 U.S.C. § 365(p)(2).

Following the passage of BAPCPA bankruptcy courts were tasked with reconciling this amendment with Section 524(a). Section 524(a) allows a chapter 7 debtor to discharge pre-petition debts and Section 524(c) prescribes how a debtor assumes personal liability after discharge for an otherwise dischargeable pre-petition obligation. Neither provision was modified by BAPCPA. Courts therefore must determine 1) whether a debtor is required to comply with Section 524(c) to assume personal liability for an executory contract; and 2) whether a debtor could discharge a lessor’s unsecured, 2 unliquidated pre-petition debt after the debtor assumed liability upon an executory lease under Section 365(p)(2)(ie., whether a debtor could waive Section 524(a) without leave of the Court).

A number of bankruptcy courts have confronted these issues with similar results. A chapter 7 debtor can agree to assume personal liability for an executory contract prior to discharge, but the effects of Section 524(a) cannot be waived without filing a “reaffirmation agreement” 3 consistent with Section 524(c). One of the earliest cases to deal with this issue was the unreported decision of In Re Finch, 2006 WL 3900111 (Bankr.D.Colo.2006). In that case the Court was asked to approve a stipulation for assumption of a lease agreement between the chapter 7 debtor and Jaguar Credit. Under the agreement, debtor agreed to assume a lease that required monthly payments that would cost one third of his net monthly income and to waive the effects of discharge under Section 524(a). The Court expressed reservations about letting a chapter 7 debtor assume a lease without filing a reaffirmation agreement pursuant to Section 524(c). Id. at *1. The Court found that Section 365(p)(2) did not require judicial approval of the agreement, thus the Court would not have an opportunity to decide whether the agreement imposed “undue hardship” on the debtor in violation of Section 524(c)(3)(B). Id. Nevertheless, the Court speculated, that the payments would clearly impose an undue hardship, and accordingly, rejected the stipulation for assumption of the lease agreement by the debtor. Id.

The Court’s discussion in In re Rogers, 359 B.R. 591 (Bankr.D.S.C.2007) addressed the implications of the reaffirmation agreement for the lessor:

This assumption of liability may not necessarily lead to an exception from discharge of the liability since § 524 has not been amended to make reference to new § 365(p)(2). One treatise states the matter this way: “If the debtor then assumes the lease, the liability under the lease will be assumed by the debtor and not the estate. However, because there *166 is no reaffirmation of the lease debt, it is not entirely clear what this means. Personal liability on the lease will ordinarily be discharged if the chapter 7 discharge is entered, presumably even if the lease is assumed.”

Id. at 593 (quoting 1-15 Collier Consumer Bankruptcy Practice Guide ¶ 15.04[8]). The Court ruled that assumption of the lease did not require court approval and that the issue as to the effect of a discharge upon the assumed lease obligations was not before the Court.

In In re Gaylor, 379 B.R. 413 (Bankr.D.Conn.2007), the Court held that because Section 365(p)(2) did not require judicial approval of the assumption of the lease, the stipulation for assumption of the lease agreement did not need to be approved by the Court. However, the Court also declined to rule as to what extent debtor had waived the effects of discharge. See also In re Walker, 2007 WL 1297112 (Bankr.M.D.N.C.2007) (holding that because neither the debtors nor the lessor had invoked Section 524(c), it would not pass judgment on the assumption of the lease agreement, which meant by implication that it did not adjudge debtors to have waived discharge).

The opinion of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts in In re Creighton, 2007 WL 541622 (Bankr.D.Mass.2007) is likely the most thorough discussion of why Section 524(c) had to survive Section 365(p)(2) and BAPCPA. In that case, the creditor filed a motion for the Court to approve two stipulations between itself and the chapter 7 debtor where the debtor agreed to assume personal liability for a pre-petition vehicle lease agreement and “ ‘waive the effect, if any, the discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 524(a) has as to the assumed Lease Agreement[s].’ ” Id. at *1 (citing the Stipulation filed therein). The court earlier had ruled that the debtor could assume the lease pending his submission and, if necessary, approval of a reaffirmation agreement consistent with Section 524(c). Id. The creditor moved for reconsideration of the requirement of the reaffirmation agreement. The Court chronicled the authority of the chapter 7 debtor to assume personal liability for executory contracts before and after BAPCPA, and the functional impact of that amendment.

When a trustee-or a debtor in possession, exercising the powers of the trustee as estate representative-assumed a debt, the estate, a stranger to the original agreement, adopted the debtor’s obligation under that agreement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re Abdemur
587 B.R. 167 (S.D. Florida, 2018)
Bobka v. Toyota Motor Credit Corp.
586 B.R. 470 (S.D. California, 2018)
In re Bailly
522 B.R. 711 (M.D. Florida, 2014)
In Re Perlman
468 B.R. 437 (S.D. Florida, 2012)
Thompson v. CREDIT UNION FINANCIAL GROUP
453 B.R. 823 (W.D. Michigan, 2011)
In Re Ebbrecht
451 B.R. 241 (E.D. New York, 2011)
In Re Mortensen
444 B.R. 225 (E.D. New York, 2011)
In Re Thompson
440 B.R. 130 (W.D. Michigan, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
426 B.R. 164, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eader-mdb-2010.