REVISED BANKRUPTCY FORMS
each category through the use of
extensive checkboxes. The asset
categories also are changed in the
modernized schedule.
Schedule C
Modernized
Schedule
106C
addresses
in-kind
property
exemptions
by
incorporating
language suggested by the U.S.
Supreme Court in Schwab v. Reilly,
560 U.S. 770 (2010). In Schwab v.
Reilly, the Court held that a trustee
is not required to object to a debtor’s
exemptions in order to preserve his
right to claim any value in the item
that exceeds the value listed as
exempt. In other words, when the
debtor’s exemptions are within the
statutory limits, the trustee is not
required to object to preserve an
argument that the asset is actually
worth more than the debtor’s
valuation. The Court also held
that when property is undervalued
at the time of the petition, or later
appreciates in value, the benefit
inures to the estate.
In its opinion, the Court explained
that a debtor who intends to exempt
“the full market value of the asset or
the asset itself” may put the trustee
on notice by listing the exempt
value of the asset on Schedule C
as “full fair market value (FMV)” or
“100% of FMV.” Of course, some
courts have had a problem with
this designation because by using
this language a debtor is seeking
to exempt property “in-kind” even
though the applicable exemption is
capped at a certain dollar amount.
As originally drafted for comment,
Schedule C included a checkbox
for the “Full fair market value of
the exempted property.” However,
the Committee was concerned that
the option would likely be found to
be an impermissible designation
under state exemption laws that
cap exemptions to a dollar amount.
Consequently, the proposed form
contains two checkbox options
under “Amount of the exemption
you claim”: (1) a checkbox followed
by a line with a dollar sign, and (2)
a checkbox followed by “100% of
fair market, up to any applicable
statutory limit.”
Schedule D
Modernized Schedule D is divided
into two parts. Creditors are listed in
Part 1, and additional notice parties,
for example, a collection agency or
an attorney representing a creditor,
are listed in Part 2. Checkboxes are
added to describe the nature of the
creditor’s lien.
Schedule E/F
Schedules E and F are combined
into a single form for unsecured
claims. Both priority and non-priority
unsecured claims are reported in
alphabetical order on the combined
schedule, although priority claims
are grouped separately from nonpriority unsecured claims.
The proposal lists priority claims
in Part 1 of the schedule, which
includes four checkboxes for
identifying the type of priority
that applies to the claim. General
National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys
Winter 2015
unsecured non-priority claims are
listed in Part 2. The “consideration
for claim” question would be
eliminated, and the proposed form
no longer asks if claims are subject
to setoff. Additional notice parties
are listed in Part 3.
Schedule G
Revised Schedule G i ́