2011•bepress Legal RepositoryOpen access

BANKRUPTCY—MIMSY WERE THE BOROGOVES: A “RIDE THROUGH” THE LOOKING GLASS WITH THE 2005 BANKRUPTCY ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

Allyson MacKenna

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This Note examines how the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) has affected debtors and creditors, and how the “ride-through” option has been a source of contention in determining their rights and responsibilities. Section I of this Note examines the options available to debtors prior to BAPCPA. Section II gives an overview of how BAPCPA came to be and how it has affected consumer debtors in general. Section III examines how BAPCPA has affected the “ride-through” option for Chapter 7 debtors and how courts have interpreted the Code using plain language and legislative purpose. This Note proposes that it is time for the courts to be less deferential to the text of the statute, and to reach an interpretation of its provisions that is consistent with both the text and the purpose of the Act. Such a commonsense approach is necessary to reach a consistent body of law that debtors, creditors, and courts can rely on.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This Note examines how the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) has affected debtors and creditors, and how the “ride-through” option has been a source of contention in determining their rights and responsibilities. Section I of this Note examines the options available to debtors prior to BAPCPA. Section II gives an overview of how BAPCPA came to be and how it has affected consumer debtors in general. Section III examines how BAPCPA has affected the “ride-through” option for Chapter 7 debtors and how courts have interpreted the Code using plain language and legislative purpose. This Note proposes that it is time for the courts to be less deferential to the text of the statute, and to reach an interpretation of its provisions that is consistent with both the text and the purpose of the Act. Such a commonsense approach is necessary to reach a consistent body of law that debtors, creditors, and courts can rely on.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This Note examines how the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) has affected debtors and creditors, and how the “ride-through” option has been a source of contention in determining their rights and responsibilities. Section I of this Note examines the options available to debtors prior to BAPCPA. Section II gives an overview of how BAPCPA came to be and how it has affected consumer debtors in general. Section III examines how BAPCPA has affected the “ride-through” option for Chapter 7 debtors and how courts have interpreted the Code using plain language and legislative purpose. This Note proposes that it is time for the courts to be less deferential to the text of the statute, and to reach an interpretation of its provisions that is consistent with both the text and the purpose of the Act. Such a commonsense approach is necessary to reach a consistent body of law that debtors, creditors, and courts can rely on.

Key concepts: Bankruptcy, Consumer Protection Act, Business, Law, Actuarial science, Finance, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
BANKRUPTCY—MIMSY WERE THE BOROGOVES: A “RIDE THROUGH” THE LOOKING GLASS WITH THE 2005 BANKRUPTCY ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT — Research Paper | ScholarLens