Monday, October 31, 2011

by Jonathan Ginsberg, Atlanta Bankruptcy

Several of my Bankruptcy Law Network colleagues have written about the scourge of "zombie debt."   This colorful name applies to very old debt that is purchased by a debt buyer at pennies on the dollar.   The moniker "zombie" refers to the fact that usually the statute of limitations for collecting this debt has expired. 

In other words, a debt buyer purchases old accounts – often credit card debt – that may be 10 years old or more and then initiates collection efforts including phone calls and even law suits.   Debtors, not knowledgeable about statutes of limitations, often do not realize that the collector has no rights whatsoever.   More aggressive debt buyers will file suit against a debtor on one of these old debts hoping to get a default judgment.   Did you know, however that a clever debt buyer can use the law to bring zombie debt back from the dead?

If you are sued on a very old debt and you do not respond, the debt buyer may get a default judgment, thereby turning an uncollectible debt into a valid and current judgment that can be used to garnish wages and bank accounts.  Once a judgment is entered, it may be too late to challenge the underlying debt.

Another tactic used by zombie debt buyer is to use telephone collection harassment to coerce a debtor to make even a small payment on the old debt.    The problem: in some states, if you make even a token payment on an old debt, that payment may revive the zombie debt and eliminate your option of raising the statute of limitations defense in a subsequent lawsuit.

It also appears that zombie debt is here to stay.  A recent article in the New York Times noted that

the debt collection industry has undergone a transformation in the last decade. Credit card issuers, health care providers and cellphone companies now routinely sell debt that they deem uncollectible to debt buyers, who then either try to collect it themselves, turn it over to a collections law firm or sell it again.

An alert lawyer should be able to spot stale debt that is beyond the statute of limitations for collection.   But a lawyer can only help you if you call on us.   So if you start getting phone calls, letters or a lawsuit about a debt that is many years old, do not assume that the bill collector will voluntarily 

back off or that the clerk of court or judge will help you.  Do not sign anything or make any payments without first calling a lawyer in your area.

Most consumer bankruptcy lawyers will speak to you on the phone for no charge and will review documents for a minimal fee.   Most larger cities have local bar associations and lawyer referral panels.  Take advantage of these free and low cost legal resources and avoid becoming a victim of the zombies.

For more information on these matters please call 305 548 5020.


Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Friday, October 28, 2011

Why Should I File Bankruptcy?

by Bankruptcy Law Network

Is your financial situation desperate? The Bankruptcy Code may be available to provide you with the "fresh start" you need.

We see people in our offices everyday-good, hard-working people-who have fallen on tough times for one reason or another. Maybe a job loss or an illness has reduced your income. Or, you have been through a difficult divorce, and you have additional debt as a result. Or, maybe you have lost a loved one. Any one of these life changing events, and many others, can leave you behind on your credit cards, with large medical bills,�a wage garnishment, or even�facing foreclosure of�the family home.

It is very possible that filing Bankruptcy could alleviate any one�of these financial difficulties.

There are two Chapters under the Bankruptcy Code typically used by individuals with personal debt. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy may allow you to discharge, or wipe-out, most if not all debt. Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, often called the Wage-Earner's Plan, may allow you to pay back a percentage of your debt, while paying past due taxes, or saving your home from foreclosure, all through a court-supervised repayment plan.

To determine�whether Bankruptcy would be a good option for you and your family, speak with a knowledgeable and experienced lawyer, as there are many variables to consider. He or she can best advise you whether you are eligible for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13, and if�Bankruptcy�is the�solution to your financial�problems. It very well may be the opportunity you are looking for to obtain that "fresh start" for your financial future.

For additional information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.



Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Can I Transfer My Assets Before I File Bankruptcy?

by Bankruptcy Law Network

I am often asked, "Can I transfer my car or my house to my relatives before I file bankruptcy?" The answer is very simple, NO.

It is a lot worse when clients come into my office and they have already transferred an asset (often because of bad advice.)� I often have to tell people you can't file bankruptcy because of the transfer.� Many times these people would have been able to file bankruptcy and keep their assets if they hadn't made the transfer.

The answer has always been don't make the transfer if you plan on filing bankruptcy. It is a lot harder to transfer assets and not get caught because of the Internet being used to helping people uncover the transfers. Bankruptcy law gives the Trustee the power to undo those transfers and bring that asset back into your bankruptcy.� They can get a court order to undo the transaction and recover that asset from your friend relative or third party.� This is called a fraudulent conveyance.

The trustee generally will be able to block your exemption in the asset if you made a fraudulent conveyance. This creates the worst scenario, you lose the asset you were trying to protect and you don't get your exemption.� Example:� You have a shiny old mustang convertible worth $7000 and you transferred it 9 months ago to your Uncle Morty.� You then file bankruptcy.� The trustee discovers this and recovers the car.� The trustee goes to sell the car and then distributes the money to your creditors.� You do not get your exemption in this asset.�� If the car was still in your name at the time you filed the bankruptcy you could have taken your state's automobile exemption.� In Ohio, the exemption is $3200.� You could have held on to that money or the car if you had not transferred it.

You could have filed Chapter 13 if the asset was worth a whole lot more.� This might have protected that asset you tried to hide.� You can also lose the benefit of your discharge if you transfer too many assets.� How far back the trustee can reach depends on a number factors.� These factors include time, your financial situation and even who� you transfer it to.

The general rule is don't make transfers prior to filing a bankruptcy.� The most important thing you can do is always consult a bankruptcy lawyer before taking any action. If you are planning on filing a bankruptcy soon, it is always best to learn your rights first.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.



Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Why Failing To Plan Is Planning To Fail In Bankruptcy Court

by Peter Orville, 

Post image for Why Failing To Plan Is Planning To Fail In Bankruptcy Court

If you are considering filing a bankruptcy petition you should consult with an experienced lawyer so you can do some planning.  But you should be careful; as with most of life, good planning will save you money  but sloppy planning can land you in hot water.

I often talk with people who are considering bankruptcy who have already tried to do some planning on their own.  They sold their car to a friend for ten dollars, or quit claimed their property to their spouse thinking that was the only way to protect it.  Sometimes they used their tax refund to pay off a loan from a relative, or "settled" a debt with one creditor.  Other times they borrowed from their retirement or took out a home equity loan to try to forestall the inevitability of having to file.

These are things you should NOT do before filing. 

A transfer for less than value is a "fraudulent conveyance" and can be reversed by a bankruptcy trustee for up to six years in New York.  Paying a debt before filing bankruptcy, especially to a relative, is a preference, and can be taken back by a trustee.  Tapping into retirement savings or home equity is needlessly depleting an asset that would have been protected in a bankruptcy.

Before filing for bankruptcy you should speak with your attorney about maximizing your exemptions.  You should discuss the best use of your funds, including the potential benefits of not paying your creditors prior to filing.

Sometimes you and your attorney need to discuss the timing of your bankruptcy filing.  If you have a potential "fraudulent conveyance" issue, you may want totransfer the property back into your name before you file.  There may even be times when it makes sense to move to another state before filing.

You can see why it is so important to consult with a knowledgeable and experienced bankruptcy attorney before you file.  Proper planning can make the entire process go smoother and leave you in better financial health at the end.  You should also take the opportunity to speak with your lawyer about planning for after your bankruptcy.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.


Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Business does not speak the B word.

by Andy Miofsky

The New York Times proclaimed Harvey Miller "The Most Prominent Bankruptcy Attorney in the Nation."  Mr. Miller may be best known for his representation of Lehman Brothers and General Motors in bankruptcy court.  His firm website lists his advocacy for one side or another in a page-full of bankruptcy cases, a who's who of corporate insolvency.  He is commonly, affectionately and reverently referred to as the heavy-hitter, the dean of the bankruptcy bar.

Too Big To Succeed

I spoke with him at my alma mater, Washington University Law, after a speech he gave about his role in the Lehman and G M cases.

I did not disclose my role as a blogger to Mr. Miller, I was there as a participant in the Continuing Legal Education program, so to be fair I will not quote him directly or mention details from our private conversation.  Instead I will relate my impression, a sort of epiphany, about the corporate debtor's attorney, that I experienced from his public presentation.


For more information on these matters , please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Bankruptcy Exemptions: The Wages of Benn

by Wendell Sherk,

In the on-going saga of Missouri bankruptcy exemptions, some apparently-settled debtor protections have recently been destabilized.  And this caused an apparent split among bankruptcy judges on at least some of these protections.

Recently, this on-going evolution visited the daily wages of consumers.  Missouri has a law which protects a large portion of an individual's income from her own services from collection by creditors, often called the "wage" exemption.  It is similar to a federal law which sets the outside maximum a creditor can garnish from personal income.

In years passed, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the federal law is not intended as an exemption in a bankruptcy case.  And some states have followed this as to their own "wage" protection laws.

But as we know, states can  make their own laws about exemptions to be used in bankruptcy.  And Missouri has opted to go the other way.

Beginning 22 years ago in bankruptcy court with In re Sanders, 69 B.R. 569 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.  1989), Missouri courts began recognizing this statute as a protection for earnings still owed to a debtor.  The Court of Appeals accepted this principle in In re Wallerstedt, 930 F.2d 630 (8th Cir. 1991) and In re Parsons, 280 F.3d 1185 (8th Cir 2002)  — while rejecting it in application in those cases.  These courts consistently held it was a bankruptcy exemption. There does not appear to have ever been a contrary state court decision.

The rule itself provides that an amount owed to a person as compensation for her own labor or "personal services" are protected up to 75% or up to 90% if the person is the financial head of a family.

In 2009, in In re Garst, Judge Venters in Kansas City examined the statute and concluded that the wage exemption would apply to funds on deposit in a bank account, if they could be traced to personal earnings.  This was because the statute used the term "paid or payable" which is identical to Social Security protections – and generally interpreted to mean that the protection follows the money.

But in 2010, Judge Surratt-States in Eastern Missouri declined to follow the Garstlogic, she concluded that the wage protection statute was not an exemption at all, in light of  Benn.  In Parsons (unrelated to the prior circuit case) the court disregarded the pre-Benn decisions applying the  wage statute as an exemption in bankruptcy because Benn entitles the individual to only those statutory enactments which explicitly state they are intended as exemptions.

In effect, Parsons puts every Missouri exemption — even if applied as an exemption for many years and supported by prior case law — to a challenge now.   It concludes there is a federally-mandated definition of "exemption" for bankruptcy purposes.  The origin of this federal mandate appears to be federal common law, not the Bankruptcy Code itself.

The potential here is that many long-accepted Missouri exemptions would seem to be "in play"  in light of the Nathan Smith and Parsons application of Benn.

One other common exemption has also been stuck down by some judges under the same theories described in this series — but this has also provoked the beginnings of a re-examination as well, as we shall see in the next installment.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.




Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Monday, October 24, 2011

How Will Serious Flood or Natural Disaster Damage Impact My Bankruptcy Case?

by Peter Orville, 

2011 has been called "The Year of the Natural Disaster".  We have seen deadly tornadoes, massive floods, billion dollar blizzards, devastating drought, East Coast earthquakes, and Texas wildfires…oh my!

Millions of Americans have had their lives seriously disrupted this year.  Many of them were in Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases at the time of the disaster, and had to not only to pick up their lives, but also had to decide what to do with their Chapter 13 case.

Chapter 13 cases usually last between 3 and 5 years.  When you file a Chapter 13 you don't always know what will happen in your life in the upcoming years.  Often there are unplanned events that cause the best Chapter 13 plans to fail, or need serious adjustment, which is one of the great advantages of a Chapter 13 over other forms of bankruptcy.

Such is the case in my area of the Southern Tier of New York State, where we had our second "500 year flood" in the last 5 years.  Here are some examples of the issues some Chapter 13 Debtors have had since the September 8th flood:

  1. The flood damaged three properties belonging to one Chapter 13 debtor.  She had severe damage to her residence, and suffered a near total loss to a rental property and to her business property.  She must now make decisions on what to do with each of the properties.  She had flood insurance for $203,000 on her residence, but the insurance company will only give her 50% of that figure and estimates are $147,000 for the repair.  She has been told to get an SBA loan for the remaining cost, but because she is in the Chapter 13, SBA will not loan to her.  The other two properties were being partially paid in the bankruptcy.  She will probably have to modify her Chapter 13 plan to surrender these properties.
  2. One couple had no flood insurance for the damage to their finished basement.  FEMA said they would not help because their particular damage came from water runoff from the hills, not directly from the flood.  They will have to do all of the needed clean up and repair out of pocket, but all of their disposable money is designated to go to the Chapter 13 Trustee.  They have asked and received permission to skip their September and October payments to the Trustee, but that is not going to be enough to cover the costs.
  3. Another couple had more damage to their home than FEMA is willing to give them, so they will have to walk away and file a modification to their Chapter 13 plan to surrender the property and stop paying arrears in the plan.
  4. One Chapter 13 debtor is not paying mortgage arrears in her plan, but still owes close to what the house was worth prior to the flood.  She is hoping that her house is condemned so she can get a buy-out.  In the meantime her family has moved into her Mother's house and wants to use the FEMA money she received to fix up her mother's house so they can live in it permanently.   They also lost a car in the flood and want to use the insurance money to replace the car, if the trustee will allow it.
  5. One couple had flood insurance and received $10,000 to replace their furnace, hot water heater and electrical system.  The insurance check was made out to them and their bank, but their bank will not release the money without making them go through many additional procedures because they are in a bankruptcy case.
  6. One unfortunate woman had planned to sell her home and get a smaller home.  She had received permission for the sale from the bankruptcy court, and had a closing scheduled two days after Tropical Storm Lee came through.  The closing was cancelled and the home was destroyed.  FEMA gave her $33,000, which is only a fraction of what she had expected from the closing.
  7. An elderly Chapter 13 couple received $26,000 from FEMA to make home repairs.  Instead, they want to walk away from their seriously damaged home and use the money to move into a senior housing unit.
  8. Another Chapter 13 debtor who had flood insurance also received a two party check to her and her mortgage company.  The bank will not disperse any money until all of the work is completed, but she can't come up with any money to lay out for the repairs.  To make matters worse, the property is a duplex and cannot be lived in until it is fixed up and approved by the town code department.  She not only has to live with her family, but has lost her rental income which she needs to keep up with her payments to the trustee.
  9. One problem several Chapter 13 debtors are facing is that a month after the flood, they are still waiting to hear from FEMA and/or their town as to whether there will be any buyouts offered for their condemned former residences.

Many of the millions of people who were affected by natural disasters this year will be speaking to bankruptcy attorneys to find out their options.  Others, may feel that they shouldn't consider bankruptcy under any circumstances.  If you know people like that, do them a favor and suggest that they find out all they can about ALL of the options open to them.  A trained, experienced bankruptcy attorney can help people through many of the difficult times that inevitably follow a natural disaster.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.





Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Friday, October 21, 2011

After my bankruptcy discharge, can I pay any of my creditors?

May a debtor pay a discharged debt after the bankruptcy case has been concluded? A debtor who has received a discharge may voluntarily repay any discharged debt – even though the debt can no longer be legally enforced. Sometimes a debtor agrees to repay a debt because it is owed to a family member or because it represents an obligation to an individual for whom the debtor's reputation is important, such as a family doctor. What can the debtor do if a creditor attempts to collect a discharged debt after the case is concluded? If a creditor attempts collection efforts on a discharged debt, the debtor can file a motion with the court, reporting the action and asking that the case be reopened to address the matter. The bankruptcy court will often do so to ensure that the discharge is not violated. The discharge constitutes a permanent statutory injunction prohibiting creditors from taking any action, including the filing of a lawsuit, designed to collect a discharged debt. A creditor can be sanctioned by the court for violating the discharge injunction. The normal sanction for violating the discharge injunction is civil contempt, which is often punishable by a fine.

May an employer terminate a debtor's employment solely because the person was a debtor or failed to pay a discharged debt? The law provides express prohibitions against discriminatory treatment of debtors by both governmental units and private employers. A governmental unit or private employer may not discriminate against a person solely because the person was a debtor, was insolvent before or during the case, or has not paid a debt that was discharged in the case. The law prohibits the following forms of governmental discrimination: terminating an employee; discriminating with respect to hiring; or denying, revoking, suspending, or declining to renew a license, franchise, or similar privilege.  A private employer may not discriminate with respect to employment if the discrimination is based solely upon the bankruptcy filing.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Thursday, October 20, 2011

The Three Year Rule for Getting Rid of Income Taxes in Bankruptcy

by Craig Andresen,

Everyone knows that you can't discharge income taxes in bankruptcy.  Right?  No, not right at all.  This misconception about bankruptcy law illustrates just why you shouldn't substitute cocktail party gossip for the advice of a good lawyer.  Especially when the question involves discharging income taxes in a consumer bankruptcy case.

Generally, income taxes are discharged in a chapter 7 or chapter 13 bankruptcy case when the tax is four years old or more.  (For those readers who owe substantial income taxes and who are learning this here for the first time, kindly place your eyeballs back into their sockets and read on for some additional qualifications.)  Discharging income tax in bankruptcy isn't accomplished through special legal wizardry; in fact it's routine and it happens automatically in most cases where the legal tests are met.

How is this possible?  Because of bankruptcy code section 523(a)(1), which lays out the tests for determining whether your income taxes can be discharged.

First, the tax must be owed for a tax year where three years have passed since the tax return was due.  Most of the time, the tax return was due on April 15.

Second, the tax return must have been filed more than two years ago.  Obviously, this rule applies only to late filers.

Third, the tax must not have been assessed with the last 240 days.  This rule applies where the tax return didn't accurately show all the tax that was owed, and the IRS just finished assessing additional taxes after discovering your mistake.

Fourth, if you wilfully attempted to evade or defeat payment of the tax, it can't be discharged.  Courts have ruled that simple non-payment, without anything more, is not enough to show that you tried to evade or defeat payment of the tax.

Sections 523 and 507 of the bankruptcy code do impose some additional requirements, but what has been written above is enough for most people to know.  If you filed your tax return on time, and if the return was accurate, and if it's been more than three years since the return was due at the latest (usually April 15 of a given year), then your taxes are going to be discharged if you file for bankruptcy, unless a specific exception in the law applies to you.  It's that simple.

If you owe income tax that you can't pay, here is what you now know you should do: first, try to avoid listening to legal advice about bankruptcy from well-meaning friends at cocktail parties, and second, get yourself to a bankruptcy lawyer to find out for sure if your income taxes are dischargeable in bankruptcy.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Marijuana Sales Can’t Fund Chapter 13 Plan

Despite state laws legalizing production of marijuana for medical use, it is not a legitimate revenue source to fund a Chapter 13 Plan.  Medical Marijuana laws have been enacted in sixteen states and the nation's capital city, Washington, DC, as of September 2011.  An additional six states have pending legislation to legalize the use of Cannabis for the treatment of various medical maladies.  Oregon is one of the states that issues permits for possession and use of medical marijuana.  Individuals with certain medical conditions designated by the statute or approved by the Health Division of the Oregon Department of Human Resources may apply for and receive a state issued permit that offers protection from criminal prosecution under Oregon law for possession of small amounts of the drug. 

In an unpublished but widely cited opinion, Oregon Chief Bankruptcy Judge Frank R. Alley, III, ruled that a Chapter 13 plan based, in part on income from a medical marijuana growing operation, did not meet the requirements of 11 USC §1325(a)(3) and could not be confirmed.  A Chapter 13 plan, to be approved by the court, must have "been proposed in good faith and not by any means forbidden by law".  Judge Alley explained that Oregon law only permitted reimbursement of medical marijuana growers for supplies and utilities.  Oregon law prohibits the receipt of compensation in excess of those limited reimbursements.  For this reason, receipts that exceed production costs would constitute illegal drug proceeds.

Federal law is unambiguous in its prohibition against the possession or sale of marijuana.  While the current Attorney General may have indicated that the federal government will not take action to disrupt use of medical marijuana in compliance with state law, the US Attorney for Oregon has stated a contrary position.  It is clear that deriving income from the production of marijuana remains illegal under Federal statutes currently in force.

There are, of course, practical concerns about an enterprise based on conduct prohibited by federal or state law.  The bankruptcy code actually requires a certain level of feasibility in that the court must find the debtor will be able to make all the payments proposed in the Chapter 13 plan.  A plan based on growing marijuana for a living, even in part, has an uncertain future. 

In addition to the concerns addressed by Judge Alley in the Oregon case, federal tax law calls into question the financial viability of marijuana growing operations.  Expenses associated with the production of medical marijuana may not be deductable for federal tax purpose.  Medical marijuana dispensory operations in California have been assessed with federal income tax liabilities after their deductions for the cost of producing and distributing medical marijuana have been disallowed.  It would be difficult indeed to generate an after tax profit with which to fund a Chapter 13 plan when ordinary business expenses are not allowed as a deduction against income.  This is particularly true in states with laws like the Oregon statute that only allows reimbursement for supplies and utilities.
 
For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 2050.


Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Mediator brings vast experience to NBA talks

by Jeff Zillgitt
 

Over and over, similar words are used to describe George Cohen's role as the federal mediator in the labor dispute between the NBA and its locked-out players.

If there is any mediator in the country who can help the sides make significant progress or even reach a deal in a short time early this week, Cohen seems to be the one with the experience, knowledge, expertise and temperament, according to labor law experts who have worked with him and are familiar with his accomplishments.

"I would point out George would be as good, if not better, than anybody I've met in my lifetime in doing that," said Buzz Hargrove, the former president of the Canadian Auto Workers, who served with Cohen on the National Hockey League Players Association's advisory board.

Over and over those same experts issue a similar warning: Cohen, the director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliatory Service, is not a savior.

"There is no better mediator in the country than the head of the FMCS. He's the superstar of our profession," Northeastern law professor and sports law expert Roger Abrams said. "On the other hand, he's not a miracle worker."

With the NBA and National Basketball Players Association entrenched in their positions, and the rhetoric escalating, Cohen faces a mountainous task: disseminate each side's position, find what each is willing to concede, discover common ground and help them find a deal — or at least get them closer.

But that's where Cohen's role ends. He's a mediator, not an arbitrator who makes a ruling.

"He can devise different ways to allow each side to achieve what they can reasonably achieve in negotiations, but only if they want a deal," Abrams said.

The sides have deep philosophical differences on how to resolve the key issues: the split of basketball-related income (BRI) and the system to distribute that money to players.

•Owners seek a collective bargaining agreement that limits club spending to achieve profits and creates more competitive balance.

•Players oppose anything that resembles a hard salary cap and drastic reductions in salary. Although players are not against competitive balance, they do not agree with the league's suggestions for achieving it.

Cohen has Monday to meet with each side separately and Tuesday to meet with both sides together. Hardly a generous amount of time to solve a $4 billion puzzle.

In a paper presented to the International Agencies Meeting in Cardiff, Wales, in September, Cohen wrote: "Without doubt, one of the most important factors in the success of the Agency's efforts is the timing of its intervention."

He is entering late in the negotiations, and the difficulty of his job increased exponentially since Cohen confirmed Wednesday he will mediate. The bloviating from both sides is rampant.

Thursday and Friday, NBA Commissioner David Stern embarked on his North American radio and TV tour, threatening all involved with the prospect of no games until after Christmas if a deal isn't reached or progress isn't made through mediation Tuesday.

•"Deal Tuesday or we potentially spiral into situations where the worsening offers on both sides make it even harder for the parties to make a deal," Stern told New York's WFAN-AM.

•"Given the absolute vaporizing of 4% of our players' compensation every week, that by the end of two weeks it's going to be $170 million lost, gone forever, and then the next two weeks will come or the rest of the season. … How many times does it pay to keep meeting and have the same things thrown back at you. We're ready to sit down and make a deal. I don't believe the union is," Stern told NBATV.

The union responded Friday at its players meeting in Los Angeles with NBPA Executive Director Billy Hunter and President Derek Fisher.

Before Hunter and Fisher spoke to the media, Washington Wizards big man JaVale McGee said some players in the meeting were ready to fold but most remained united.

Hunter and Fisher had to clean up McGee's misstep, and McGee said his words were twisted.

Fisher then said Stern's Tuesday deadline for a deal or no games until after Christmas was "an arbitrary deadline to throw out on Commissioner Stern's part."

Hunter had sharp words for Stern and the owners.

"If somebody is pointing a gun at my head, I'm going to point one back at him," Hunter said. "The door doesn't swing one way. It's not just the players who will suffer if games are lost. What he failed to reveal to you is the amount of economic damage they're going to suffer as a consequence."

Cohen must untangle the train wreck.

President Obama appointed Cohen to the head of the FMCS in October 2009. In that role he has mediated disputes between Major League Soccer and the Major League Soccer Players Union, the NFL and NFL Players Association, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, according to the FMCS web site.

According to the FMCS 2010 fiscal report, the agency mediated 4,919 cases in 2010 and 86% of mediated cases were settled by the FMCS.

Born in 1934, Cohen went to Cornell for his bachelor and law degree, served in the Army and received his LLM at Georgetown, according to peggybrowningfund.org, a nonprofit for law students interested in labor law.

Cohen worked for the National Labor Relations Board and the Appellate Court Branch until 1966. From then until 2005, Cohen worked for the Washington D.C., law firm Bredhoff & Kaiser, which specializes in labor law and is known as "the voice of labor," according to its web site.

During his 40 years, Cohen argued and won five cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

His work is diverse: health and safety issues, pro sports, teachers, rail industry, entertainment industry (including the Directors Guild, Screen Actors Guild and symphony orchestras). He also once worked for the NBPA.

In 1981, Cohen was named Labor Lawyer of the Year by American Lawyer, according to peggybrowningfund.com. That same year, Cohen represented the Major League Baseball Players Association during that strike.

In the MLPBA's unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board that year, Cohen cross-examined baseball's labor relations chief Ray Grebey for nearly two hours and used newspaper articles to show baseball, according to Grebey's quotes, was concerned about escalating salaries and wanted to reduce them in the next CBA.

At first glance, Cohen's long association with unions, especially pro sports unions, might scare the NBA. But his reputation as a fair, unbiased mediator is not a concern.

"He's not going to bring any of his biases or his last experience into these discussions. He's dedicated to being neutral," Hargrove said.

Stanford law professor William Gould worked with Cohen at the NLRBd in the 1960s. He described Cohen as "simpatico."

"George is a great listener, very simpatico and interested in sounding one out about their opinions and views," Gould said. "He's respected by both sides, has done a lot of mediation and is quite effective. It's unusual that management would have this kind of confidence in somebody who has spent a lot of his career on one side."

Monday, Cohen will meet with each side separately, and mostly listen, Abrams said. "The most effective mediators are reflective. He's going to listen to their position, and he's someone in the room who is not going to tell the other side no," Abrams said.

After spending time with his staff, Cohen on Tuesday will try to see if he can bridge the sides.

"Every time he is involved in a case, he may not bring a resolution or an immediate resolution but he always leaves the parties better than they were before he entered," Abrams said. "That's all you can hope for from a mediator. You'd love to think a mediator is a life saver. He's not."

Abrams has been skeptical of the sides reaching a deal in time to save the season.

"No one should read USA TODAY and think, 'It's all going to be settled on Tuesday,' " Cohen said. "There are times when every business and group of employees face the potential of Armageddon. We're getting real close.

"Now, will I be surprised if on Tuesday, there's a deal? I would be both surprised and absolutely delighted. That means not that George worked miracles, but the parties needed to save face and the way to do it is by having an intermediary there and to make concessions, not to the other side, but to the mediator. But don't count on it."

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Friday, October 14, 2011

FRANK CLARK CC PAYMENT 786 423 2857

PLEASE CALL FRANK YOU MET AT BNI 

--
Sincerely,

Tatiana, Restrepo, Front Office Manager
From the Law Office of Yoel Molina, P. A.
Office: 305-548-5020
782 NW 42nd Ave, Suite 343, Miami, Fl. 33126 in the "Ocean Bank" Building


Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Got a traffic ticket in Miami -Dade? go now to www.miamionlinetrafficattorney.com

Bankruptcy | Sports Law | All Criminal Cases | Traffic | DUI Defense | Family Law



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, if any, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and /or attorney-client privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communications through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.




Can I File Bankruptcy In My New State?

by Susanne Robicsek,

If you just moved and you need to file for bankruptcy, don't panic!  If anyone tells you that you don't qualify to file because you haven't lived in your new state for six months, don't listen to them!  If a lawyer tells you that you can't file until you have been in your new home for six months,  call another experienced lawyer.  If an attorney doesn't know thatyou do not need to live in a new state for the full six months to file bankruptcy there, they probably are not as knowledgeable as you want for your attorney.

Here is the rule and it is pretty simple:

You are supposed to file for bankruptcy where you have lived the greater part of the preceding 180 days ….. in other words where you have lived for MOST of the preceding six months.

To make it even simpler:

The general rule is you need to have been there for 91 days.

That wasn't so hard, was it?   If the bankruptcy attorney you are talking to doesn't know that basic fact, what else don't they know?

You are supposed to file your case where you lived before, if you lived there long enough.    If you haven't been in your state at least 91 days, and you have moved around a lot, it gets a little more complicated but any good attorney can figure out where you are supposed to file.

On top of that, does it really matter that you haven't been in your new home long?  Probably not.  Many people can wait a little while to file for bankruptcy.  In the time you have to reach the magic day, you can consult a lawyer, plan to file, pay your lawyer and complete paperwork.  Before you know it, you have been in the state long enough to pass 91 days.

If you have a true emergency filing situation, you should consider filing where you meet the requirements, or ask an experienced lawyer whether or not the 91 day rule is strictly enforced.  You may take a risk filing early, but you might not have much of a choice under the circumstances you can't get back to where you are supposed to be properly filed.

For more information on these matters, please call our office  at 305 548 5020.




Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"






Thursday, October 13, 2011

Is Bankruptcy Your Best Investment?

by Cathy Moran

Spend money, when you're broke, to go broke?  Seems counter-intuitive, but it could be the best money you spend.

Fear, pride, uncertainty, stubbornness, distraction, and cash flow keep people from getting their financial life  in order with a bankruptcy filing.

As a means of regaining control of your life and your pocketbook, however, it may be the best move you can make.

Inaction, however unpleasant, is easy.  It's familiar and tolerable.  Like it or not, it's a safe choice.

You can't get more hurt by doing nothing, right?  It's the devil you know, as opposed to the devil you don't.

But what if the alternative is getting out from under your bill problems and jump starting your financial life?  Clearly, in that case it becomes far more attractive to leap than to stand still.

So if you're having bill problems and are on the fence, these ten reasons that filing bankruptcy now may help you make your decision.

  1. The stress of bills you can't pay, collection calls, and worry about garnishment can ruin your health.
  2. Current law and depressed property values may allow the voiding of junior liens on  your home.  If values increase in future, this opportunity may be unavailable.
  3. No tax is generated by discharging debts in bankruptcy;  not so, if you settle debts outside of bankruptcy.
  4. You can keep more of your assets when exemptions are applied to investments with depressed current value.
  5. The federal tax exclusion for cancellation of debt on foreclosures of principal residences expires in 2012, is limited in scope, and doesn't deal with state taxes.
  6. Your credit report doesn't start healing until the debts are paid off or discharged in bankruptcy.
  7. Relationships suffer in times of financial distress.  Save your marriage, ditch your debts.
  8. Anonymity in numbers:  there have been lots of bankruptcy filings over the past several years.  Your decision to file now makes you one of a crowd of people with the same problem.
  9.  Wait to file  until your income improves and the means test may require that you file a repayment plan.
  10. You aren't getting any younger:  chances are you are poorly prepared for retirement.  Every dollar spent making minimum payments is a dollar you're not saving for retirement.

For most of those buried in debt, neither inaction nor incremental solutions will solve the problem.  Many of the "reasons" that hold people back from the bankruptcy solution are based in myth and misunderstanding.  Think through my list, follow the links to read more, and imagine a life free of dischargeable debts.

See a bankruptcy lawyer and explore how these principals apply to your situation.  The financial return on a bankruptcy filing is eye popping.

For more information, please call our office at 305 548 5020.




Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"