Staying Current with Reed Law Firm: Understanding Recent South Carolina U.S. Bankruptcy Court Decisions
Bankruptcy is a unique area of federal legal practice often subject to change. In common law jurisdictions such as South Carolina, judicial bankruptcy decisions in one case can dictate how the law is applied in similar cases. Although bankruptcy law is federal, every judge in every court has the power to interpret and apply bankruptcy law in his or her jurisdiction.
Bankruptcy law is extremely jurisdictionally dependent, and claimants considering filing for bankruptcy in Columbia, S.C., should only retain a bankruptcy law firm with experience handling petitions in the Columbia Division of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Carolina (J. Bratton Davis U.S. Bankruptcy Courthouse). If you have questions about how bankruptcy law applies in your case, contact the experienced Columbia bankruptcy lawyers at Reed Law Firm, P.A.
In re Turner (2024) (Case No. 24-00811-HB)
In this Chapter 13 bankruptcy case to restructure personal debts, the Court denied the bankruptcy plan proposed by the debtor upon the mortgage holder’s objection. The judge found that the debtor’s plan relied on potential future negotiations to modify a loan without providing for any concrete current or future payments to the mortgage holder. The plan was considered too speculative to satisfy the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 1325.
In re Bishop (2024) (Case No. 24-04005-HB)
In another Chapter 13 case, the Court found that the debtors indeed complied with all plan proposals. The debtors filed all necessary paperwork, provided adequate protection, and proposed a confirmable plan. As such, bankruptcy protections remained in place, and the Court denied the creditor’s request to sell the debtor’s repossessed vehicle. The Court also denied the creditor’s request for attorneys’ fees and court costs.
In re Williams (2024) (Case No. 24-03939-HB)
The Court denied the creditor’s attempt to evict Jeffery and Crystal Williams from their rental mobile home during Chapter 13 proceedings. The Court refused to lift the stay and found as follows:
- Debtors proposed a fair modified plan to cure all rental arrears within two years
- The creditor did not object to the initial automatic bankruptcy stay
- The Williams were ready and able to pay post-petition rental arrears
- Movant’s interests were adequately protected
- Attempts were made to pay arrears, though rejected by the creditor, throughout the course of the case
Even after prior bankruptcy dismissals and outstanding arrears, the judge still provided the debtors with protection under the modified plan.
In re Badalamenti (2025) (Case No. 25-00102-EG)
In this case, filed during complex divorce proceedings, the debtor’s wife requested relief from the automatic bankruptcy stay to allow the South Carolina family court to continue with equitable distribution proceedings. The Court found that equitable distribution was best addressed by the state family court and deferred to the family judge’s experience handling equitable distribution claims fairly. The judge conditionally lifted the stay to allow divorce proceedings to finalize.
Discuss Your Unique Case with the Columbia Bankruptcy Attorneys at Reed Law Firm
Our dedicated bankruptcy lawyers focus their practice on South Carolina bankruptcy law, keeping up to date on all recent decisions and legal changes. For questions about the outcome of your potential bankruptcy case, call our experienced Columbia bankruptcy law firm today at (803) 726-4888 or connect with our legal team online.
