On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Bankruptcy Basics for Low-Income Clients 2017 (Free)

Released on: Sep. 17, 2017
Running Time: 06:12:10

Although the economy is improving and foreclosures in many parts of the country are in decline due to rising home values, financially marginalized people still file bankruptcy in disproportionate numbers.  Many debtors are unrepresented and bankruptcy clinics are still in great demand.  There is a critical need for pro bono attorneys to assist low-income clients at all levels.  The practice of bankruptcy law is ever changing (all of the forms changed effective April 1, 2016) and can be quite complicated with even the simplest form of bankruptcy, Chapter 7.  This basic program was developed for brand new practitioners and those who are either not familiar with the practice or have not practiced bankruptcy law since the passage of BAPCPA.  The program hopes to develop practitioners who will volunteer their time and skills to those who cannot afford representation.  The program will focus on Chapter 7 bankruptcy, from the day a new client walks into your office, to the day you receive notice that they have successfully received a discharge and their case is closed.

You will learn:

  • An overview of Chapter 7 bankruptcy
  • Duties and due diligence of the attorney
  • How the discharge works and the effectiveness of the automatic stay
  • How to protect the debtor’s property through exemptions
  • An overview of the means test for the low-income client
  • Issues in bankruptcy to be aware of and understand

This program was designed for practitioners, paralegals and legal assistants who are new to bankruptcy or new to BAPCPA.  It is a basic “How to File a Chapter 7” program.

If you would like to volunteer in pro bono clinics, develop bankruptcy as one of your practice areas, or are a new attorney who wants to develop a bankruptcy practice, this program will give you the tools you need to get started in the practice of Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:12:10]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:05:31]
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Overview – Chapter 7 Bankruptcy [01:03:29]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Duties of the Attorney in a Bankruptcy Case [01:00:45]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Section 707(b) – Means Test Overview and Filing a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case [01:00:50]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Bankruptcy Estate and Exemptions and The Automatic Stay and Discharge of Debts in Bankruptcy Cases [01:14:24]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • The 341(a) hearing aka Meeting of Creditors [00:45:41]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • After the Filing of the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy [01:01:30]
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little

 

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

 

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Part I: Overview of Bankruptcy Law: Sources, Jurisdiction, Parties & Debt Relief Agency
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Chapter 7, Liquidation Under the Bankruptcy Code
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Main Duties of a Chapter 7 Trustee
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Stern v. Marshall, No. 10-179, Supreme Court of the United States (Slip Opinion) (2011)
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, No. 13-935, Supreme Court of the United States (Slip Opinion) (2015)
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • 11 U.S.C. §101—Definition of Debt Relief Agency
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • 11 U.S.C. §526—Restrictions on Debt Relief Agencies
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Milavetz v. United States of America, No. 08-1119, Brief for the United States, Supreme Court of the United States (2009)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • 11 U.S.C. §527—Disclosures
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • 11 U.S.C. §528—Requirements for Debt Relief Agencies
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Hypothetical: The Debtors, Penelope and Richard Denton (“Penny and Rich”)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Hypothetical: Bankruptcy Client Questionnaire (“Penny and Rich”)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Hypothetical—Bankruptcy Forms (“Penny and Rich”)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Part I: Overview of Bankruptcy Law: Sources, Jurisdiction, Parties, & Debt Relief Agency, New Forms (PowerPoint slides)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Part II: Duties of the Attorney in a Bankruptcy Case
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Guidelines for Legal Services to Be Provided by Debtors’ Attorneys in Chapter 7 Cases, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Bankruptcy Client Questionnaire—Kornfield, Nyberg, Bendes & Kuhner
    Sarah Lampi Little
  • Bankruptcy Client Questionnaire—Lincoln Law
    Carl R. Gustafson
  • Client Forms, Consultation Agreement and Acknowledgment of Receipt of Disclosures and Instructions—Lincoln Law
    Carl R. Gustafson
  • Bankruptcy Client Questionnaire—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Initial Consultation Information—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Client Intake Sheet—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Initial Consultation Agreement and Required Notices—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Initial Consultation—Example of Too Much Information Requested—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Guidelines for New Chapter 7 Cases—Elkington Shepherd
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Attorney Client Agreement—Chapter 7
    Sally J. Elkington
  • Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U.S. 410, 112 S.Ct. 773, Supreme Court of the United States (1992)
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Bank of America, N. A. v. Caulkett, No. 13-1421, Supreme Court of the United States (Slip Opinion) (2015)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part II: Attorney Duties (PowerPoint slides)
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part III & IV: Means Test and Filing a Chapter 7 Case
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Notice Required by 11 U.S.C. § 342(b) for Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy (Form 2010)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • The Means Test Flow Chart
    Carl R. Gustafson
  • Chapter 7 Statement of Your Current Monthly Income (Official Form 122A-1)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Statement of Exemption from Presumption of Abuse Under § 707(b)(2) (Official Form 122A–1Supp)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Chapter 7 Means Test Calculation (Official Form 122A-2)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • 11 U.S.C. §707—Dismissal of a case or conversion to a case under chapter 11 or 13
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Statement of the U.S. Trustee Program’s Position on Legal Issues Arising Under the Chapter 7 Means Test
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Part III: Means Test (PowerPoint slides)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Sample Official Form 101—Voluntary Petition for Individuals Filing for Bankruptcy
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Application to Have the Chapter 7 Filing Fee Waived (Official Form 103B)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Reaffirmation Agreement Forms
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Part IV: Filing a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case (PowerPoint slides)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part V: Bankruptcy Estate & Exemptions
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Exemptions by State
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Exemptions—How to Figure Which to Use
    Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Part V: Bankruptcy Estate & Exemptions (PowerPoint slides)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part VI: The Automatic Stay and Discharge of Debts
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Sample Complaint Seeking Damages in Core Adversary Proceeding—Violation of Automatic Stay
    Carl R. Gustafson
  • Beezley v. California Land Title Company, 994 F.2d 1433, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (1993)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little
  • 11 U.S.C. §523—Exceptions to Discharge
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part VI: The Automatic Stay and Discharge of Debts (PowerPoint slides)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Part VII: The §341 Hearing aka Meeting of Creditors
    Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson
  • Section 341(a) Meeting of Creditors—Required Statements/Questions
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Main Duties of a Chapter 7 Trustee
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Part VII: 341 Hearing (PowerPoint slides)
    Sarah Lampi Little, Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington
  • Part VIII: After the Filing of the Bankruptcy
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little, Sally J. Elkington
  • Sample Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §522(f), United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California, Oakland Division
    Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part VIII: After 341 Meeting (PowerPoint slides)
    Carl R. Gustafson, Sally J. Elkington, Sarah Lampi Little

 

Presentation Material

 

  • Part I: Overview of Bankruptcy Law: Sources, Jurisdiction, Parties, & Debt Relief Agency (PowerPoint slides)
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part II: Attorney Duties (PowerPoint slides)
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part III: Means Test; Part IV: Filing a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case (PowerPoint slides)
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part V: Bankruptcy Estate & Exemptions; Part VI: The Automatic Stay and Discharge of Debts (PowerPoint slides)
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part VII: 341 Hearing
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
  • Part VIII: After 341 Meeting
    Sally J. Elkington, Carl R. Gustafson, Sarah Lampi Little
Chairperson(s)
Sally J. Elkington ~ Bankruptcy Practitioner, Partner, Elkington Shepherd LLP
Speaker(s)
Carl R. Gustafson ~ Bankruptcy Practitioner, Managing Partner, Lincoln Law
Sarah Lampi Little ~ Bankruptcy Practitioner and Chapter 7 Trustee, Attorney, Shareholder, Kornfield, Nyberg, Bendes, Kuhner & Little, P.C.
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

 

Share
Email
The panel is excellent, I have taken 3 courses with them and they know the material. I always learn something new.
- Melissa Cofan, Attorney
Cofan Law Office

This was a fabulous CLE.  The presenters did an amazing job breaking it all down and providing real life examples.  This was worth every second of my time.  Thank you.
- Wendy C. Ferrell, Esq.
Solo Practitioner, Gig Harbor, WA


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.