(U.S. Dist. Ct., E.D. Va., Mar. 23, 2010) – Virginia filed a federal lawsuit today, charging that if its citizens and residents decide not to buy health insurance, then they can’t be subject to the new federal health care and insurance law since they are not not engaging in interstate commerce. Learn why Virginia filed its own lawsuit, instead of joining the multi-state lawsuit filed by thirteen other states challenging the new law.
BANKRUPTCY LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, EDUCATION LAW
United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa, No. 08–1134
In an appeal from a bankruptcy court order in a Chapter 13 proceeding, enforcing the confirmation of a student loan debtor’s plan and directing creditors to cease any collection efforts, the Ninth Circuit’s judgment reversing a district court’s order in favor of student loan creditor is affirmed where: 1) creditor’s actual notice of the filing and contents of the debtor’s plan more than satisfied its due process rights, and thus debtor’s failure to make the required service did not entitle creditor to relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4); 2) although the bankruptcy court’s failure to find undue hardship in this case was a legal error, the confirmation order was enforceable and binding on creditor because it had actual notice of the error and failed to object or timely appeal; but 3) the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that bankruptcy courts must confirm a plan proposing the discharge of a student loan debt without an undue hardship determination in an adversary proceeding unless the creditor timely raises a specific objection.