In re Jenkins

Decision Date06 October 2021
Docket NumberC/A No. 20-02610-JW
Parties IN RE: Rapheal Maurice JENKINS, Debtor(s).
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Courts. Fourth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of South Carolina

Jason T. Moss, Moss & Associates, Attorneys, P.A., Columbia, SC, for Debtor(s).

ORDER

John E. Waites, US Bankruptcy Judge This matter comes before the Court upon an Application for Settlement and Compromise filed by Rapheal Maurice Jenkins ("Debtor") on September 16, 2021. According to the Application, Debtor settled a pre-petition personal injury cause of action for physical injuries due to an automobile accident for a payment in the amount of $23,500.00. From that payment, Debtor proposes to pay her attorney's fees in the amount of $8,225.00, litigation costs of $1,225.00, directly related medical bills of $4,689.00, and medical insurance subrogation liens of $169.22, which would then provide a net recovery to Debtor in the amount of $9,191.78.

Debtor disclosed the pre-petition cause of action, claimed it as exempt1 and identified her state court counsel for the prosecution of the claim, Goings Law Firm, in her Schedules and Statements filed on July 15, 2020. At that time, Debtor valued the claim at zero since it was nonliquidated but still contingent on a trial or settlement but claimed 100% of the amount of the exemption allowed under applicable state law. No party timely objected to the exemption claim.

According to the recent opinion in In re Williams , 631 B.R. 398, 400–01 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2021), which cited In re Boyd , 618 B.R. 133, 174 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2020) and Wilson v. Dollar General Corporation, 717 F.3d 337, 343-44 (4th Cir. 2013), a chapter 13 may maintain and prosecute a cause of action on behalf of the estate in his own name, exclusive of the trustee, in any tribunal, and without court approval. Therefore, according to those cases, it was unnecessary to file the Application seeking approval2 or to serve the entire creditor matrix and provide an objection period, which in turn delays the disbursement of settlement funds.3 Nevertheless, the Chapter 13 Trustee immediately received electronic notice of the Application upon its filing and has now entered her consent to the Application.

The pertinent question before the Court is not the approval of the settlement but the use of the proceeds therefrom which would originally be property of the Chapter 13 estate according to 11 U.S.C. §§ 541 and 1306. However, since the settlement funds were claimed as exempt, they are no longer property of the estate nor subject to the oversight of the bankruptcy trustee or Court. Therefore, the use of the proceeds for the payments and distributions mentioned in the Application does not require court approval.

Similar to the Williams case, the Court finds that the payment of state court counsel from exempt settlement proceeds created by its representation of Debtor at a 35% contingency fee rate, the payment of necessary litigation costs and the payment of medical bills and liens related to the accident should be allowed, and, to the extent necessary, are approved for disbursement. Regarding state court counsel, as stated in In re Overstreet , C/A No. 07-05397, slip op. at 3 (Bankr. D.S.C. Mar. 5, 2010), there is no requirement for notice and approval of the debtor's employment of a non-bankruptcy...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT