574 B.R. 819
Bankr. E.D. Mich.2017Background
- Debtor filed Chapter 7 on July 21, 2016; first meeting of creditors set for August 25, 2016.
- Debtor was required to file an Official Form certificate of completion of a post-petition financial management course within 60 days after the §341 meeting (deadline Oct. 24, 2016).
- Debtor failed to file the certificate by the deadline; case was closed October 25, 2016 without a discharge and notice to debtor/attorney was mailed Oct. 27, 2016.
- Nearly one year later (Sept. 7, 2017 course completion; Oct. 2, 2017), Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and submitted the certificate and related form.
- Motion sought reopening to permit retroactive filing/extension so a discharge could issue; Motion offered no valid explanation for the nearly one-year delay in completing the course or seeking reopening.
- Court denied the Motion to reopen (but waived the motion filing fee) and struck the late certificate and form; debtor may file a new case.
Issues
| Issue | Debtor's Argument | Trustee/Opposition Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether cause exists to reopen a closed Chapter 7 to permit filing of a late financial-management certificate | Debtor completed the course (Sept. 7, 2017) and requests reopening so discharge can issue; seeks fee waiver | No valid excuse for failing to comply timely or for nearly one-year delay; reopening frustrates statutory purpose and prejudices creditors | Denied (no cause shown); fee waiver granted |
| Whether court should retroactively enlarge time to file the certificate under Rule 1007/9006 | Late completion justifies nunc pro tunc extension | Extensions require motion for cause and notice; debtor gave no cause and waited too long | Denied — no retroactive extension granted |
| Whether the late certificate and related filings should remain on docket | Certificate proves completion but untimely; reopening requested | Documents are untimely and case remains closed | Stricken from the docket |
| Whether debtor may later cure by reopening or other means | Reopening requested now | Reopening denied but debtor may file a new bankruptcy case | Debtor not barred from filing a new case |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosinski v. Rosinski, 759 F.2d 539 (6th Cir.) (reopening decisions committed to bankruptcy court discretion)
- In re Barrett, 569 B.R. 687 (E.D. Mich. 2017) (denying reopening for very long delay to file financial-management certificate)
- In re Johnson, 500 B.R. 594 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2013) (denying reopening where post-petition course and certificate were filed years late)