653 B.R. 247
Bankr. E.D. Mich.2023Background
- Debtors filed a joint Chapter 13 petition on July 29, 2012; plan confirmed Feb. 13, 2013 (36 months); plan payments completed Nov. 17, 2016.
- By rule, Debtors had to file a Financial Management Course Certificate by the last plan payment (Nov. 17, 2016) and a Certification Regarding Domestic Support Obligations within 28 days after the trustee’s notice (deadline Jan. 11, 2017).
- Debtors did not file either certification while the case was open; the case was closed on Feb. 22, 2017 without entry of discharge and notice was mailed to Debtors and their counsel.
- On Aug. 24, 2023 (≈6.5 years after closure) Debtors moved to reopen under LBR 5010-1 to file the domestic-support certification (and would also need to file the financial-management certificate and obtain retroactive extensions) to secure a discharge.
- The Motion offered no explanation for the failures or the long delay; Debtors were represented throughout and had received reminders/notices.
- Court applied the four-factor test (reasonable explanation, timeliness, fault with counsel, creditor prejudice), found all factors against reopening or granting retroactive extension, and denied the motion; Debtors remain free to file a new bankruptcy case.
Issues
| Issue | Debtors' Argument | Respondent/Court's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether to reopen the closed Chapter 13 case to allow filing the Certification Regarding Domestic Support Obligations after a 6+ year delay | Reopen so Debtors can file the certification and obtain a discharge | Debtors showed no cause/excuse; extreme untimeliness; were counseled and notified; creditors prejudiced by delay | Denied — no cause to reopen; four-factor test favors denial |
| Whether to grant a retroactive extension to file the Financial Management Course Certificate and permit a discharge | Reopen and grant retroactive extension so Debtors can file the certificate and receive discharge | Retroactive extension requires cause and notice under Rule 1007(c); Debtors never showed cause; delay and prejudice weigh against extension | Denied — no retroactive extension; certificate not filed while case open; no discharge granted in this case |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosinski v. Rosinski, 759 F.2d 539 (6th Cir. 1985) (reopening decisions committed to bankruptcy court's discretion)
- In re Barrett, 569 B.R. 687 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2017) (applied four-factor test and denied reopening after long delay)
- In re Adamson, 615 B.R. 303 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2020) (debtor must accept statutory burdens to obtain discharge)
- In re Johnson, 500 B.R. 594 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2013) (long delay in seeking to file post‑petition certificate supports denial of reopening)