Wife divorced me, judge ruled that she should pay me $30,000 lump sum plus return certain items . -She filed for bankruptcy Chapter 13. The MEETING OF CREDITORS was 6-23-2013
The CONFIRMATION HEARING was cancelled.
I have two weeks to file an objection. Wife has in access of $300,000 in her retirement fund
The judgment of dissolution is non DSO obligation, since court ruled no alimony was needed
Section 523a09150 does not apply to Chapter 13's
What should I do?
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Attorney
Her retirement funds are protected by bankruptcy exemptions. You should contact an attorney so you do not blow the deadlines. $30,000 is worth an attorney to you I assume. You can find collection attorneys in this web site in your area that can represent you for the objection.
3 lawyers agree
You are correct that your ex-wife may be able to discharge the $30,000 that she owes to you in a chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding. This is assuming that she completes her chapter 13 plan payments. Your objective, along with a competent legal representative, is to find some defect in her chapter 13 plan, her schedule of assets and liabilities, her ability to pay more to unsecured creditors, or her eligibility to be in a chapter 13 bankruptcy at all. You'll need to challenge this bankruptcy on a technical level, because the law is not going to protect you here. Good luck!
Chapter 13 cases can be very technical. Perhaps you/your attorney will be able to object based upon the failure to properly list assets, or failure to properly reflect her living expenses, or failure to comply with the Bankruptcy Code.
The problem is, the Bankruptcy Code does permit a payment for equitable distribution to be discharged after a debtor completes payments under a Plan. You may not be able to avoid your ex from escaping the full amount of the equalizing payment.
I hope you found this response to be helpful. If so, your clicking "helpful" and/or "best answer" helps my Avvo rating and would be appreciated. This answer shall not be considered rendering legal advise but instead a general response to a general question. Avvo is a wonderful resource but nothing can substitute for an in-depth consultation face-to-face with a lawyer. The response shall not be deemed to create an attorney-client relationship, nor shall it create an obligation on the part of the attorney to respond to further inquiry from the questioner.