Blogs
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" is Latin for the fallacy of reasoning of "after this, therefore because of this." In an episode of West Wing, President Bartlet challenged the 27 lawyers in the room that at least one of them should know the meaning of this Latin phrase. In an episode of Big Bang, Sheldon also mentions this logical fallacy.
Logical Fallacy"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" is a logical fallacy referring to questionable causation, that is, "since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." This example is given: "The rooster crows immediately before the sunrise, therefor the rooster causes the sun to rise." Even Ernie on Sesame Street falls victim to this fallacy of reasoning in this clip where he reached the conclusion that it is the banana in his ear that is keeping the alligators away.
5th and 11th Circuit
The Court in Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2009) refers to this logical fallacy in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony. The Court in Huss reviewed that it "is axiomatic that causation testimony is inadmissible if an expert relies upon studies or publications, the authors of which were themselves unwilling to conclude that causation had been proven."
More Logical Fallacies to Avoid
- "Argumentum ad Hominen" - argument directed to the person - instead of attacking the opponent's argument, the character of the opponent is attacked.
- "Argumentum ad Misericordian" - an appeal to pity - the audience is asked to accept an argument not due to the strength of the argument but rather because of the speaker's piteous circumstances.
- "Argumentum ad Populum" - the appeal to emotion - the attempt to establish its conclusion with values the speaker's audience holds dear.
- "Ignoratio Elenchi" - proving an irrelevant conclusion - attacking the "straw man".
- "Petitio Principii" - a circular argument - begging the question.
The Beatles
It is now known that the Beatles' song were full, full, full of logical fallacies, such as: sweeping generalizations ("all you need is love"), ad agnorantium/appeal to ignorance ("no where man, please listen, you don't know what you're missing"), oversimplification ("it's easy"), straw man ("everywhere there's lot of piggies living piggy lives"), and a popular idea must be correct ("I get by with a little help from my friends"). But here Paul actually warns making logical fallacies: ("Think of what you're saying, you can get it wrong, and still you think that it's all right.")
Further
Here is an explanation of further logical fallacies and critical thinking that may help a lawyer. Here is more and more and more and more and more and finally the logical fallacy that has caused some much trouble: "Home prices have not fallen since the Great Depression. Therefore, home prices will not fall."Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
A chapter 13 case is started by filing a petition with the Bankruptcy Court along with the schedules and statements that explain the person's financial situation. Under chapter 13, the debtor must submit a plan or reorganization to provide for his various classes of debt - priority, secured, and unsecured. A chapter 13 debtor is generally required to devote all of his "projected disposable income" to repay a percentage of unsecured debt over a period of three to five years.
A chapter 13 case is overseen by a chapter 13 trustee. The main duties of a chapter 13 trustee is to receive the monthly chapter 13 plan payments and to distribute them to the creditors pursuant to the chapter 13 plan.
A chapter 13 debtor receives a discharge after all payments required under the chapter 13 plan have been completed.Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
A chapter 13 case is started by filing a petition with the Bankruptcy Court along with the schedules and statements that explain the person's financial situation. Under chapter 13, the debtor must submit a plan or reorganization to provide for his various classes of debt - priority, secured, and unsecured. A chapter 13 debtor is generally required to devote all of his "projected disposable income" to repay a percentage of unsecured debt over a period of three to five years.
A chapter 13 case is overseen by a chapter 13 trustee. The main duties of a chapter 13 trustee is to receive the monthly chapter 13 plan payments and to distribute them to the creditors pursuant to the chapter 13 plan.
A chapter 13 debtor receives a discharge after all payments required under the chapter 13 plan have been completed.Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
When a person files for bankruptcy in Florida and owes a gambling debt in Nevada, which states' law apply in determining whether the claim on the gambling debt should be allowed or whether it is dischargeable or nondischargeable? A 2006 Florida bankruptcy ruling dealt with this issue.
The Bankruptcy Court reviewed that normally a federal court hearing a matter pursuant to diversity jurisdiction must apply the law of the state in which it sits, but that such rule does not apply to a bankruptcy court as it is not sitting as a court of diversity. The Bankruptcy Court reviewed prior precedent that noted that the choice of which state's law applies should in part be based on which state's law more logically relates to the claim and the "significant relationship" test.
Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
When a person files for bankruptcy in Florida and owes a gambling debt in Nevada, which states' law apply in determining whether the claim on the gambling debt should be allowed or whether it is dischargeable or nondischargeable? A 2006 Florida bankruptcy ruling dealt with this issue.
The Bankruptcy Court reviewed that normally a federal court hearing a matter pursuant to diversity jurisdiction must apply the law of the state in which it sits, but that such rule does not apply to a bankruptcy court as it is not sitting as a court of diversity. The Bankruptcy Court reviewed prior precedent that noted that the choice of which state's law applies should in part be based on which state's law more logically relates to the claim and the "significant relationship" test.
Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
Before your bankruptcy attorney pulls the trigger on an actual filing, you should undergo a thorough final review of your petition. You may discover that your monthly plan payment can change based upon your current circumstances. You may have assets that have shifted or otherwise transferred in the ordinary course of business. You also may+ Read More
The post Final Review Of Your Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Petition appeared first on David M. Siegel.
The issuance by the Floirda Third District Court of Appeals in Miami of the recent decision in Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, etc. v. Harry Beauvais, et al., Case No. 3D14-575, may be an appropriate time to review what actions a Miami homeowner that seeks to save their home from foreclosure. If upheld, the Court's decision may indicate that some notions of "foreclosure defense" may need to be reviewed.
A homeowner seeking to save their home from foreclosure may be better served on directing his or her efforts towards the modification of their mortgage instead of "winning" a foreclosure case. For example, it appears that in many or most cases, arguments regarding statute of limitations issues may not result in a "quiet title" judgment.
Present Modification Opportunities
If a homeowner seeks to save their home from foreclosure, focusing primarily on "foreclosure defense" is not likely to be the solution. The federal government, the mortgage lenders, and the general economic climate, present good opportunities to modify your mortgage that may not exist in years to come. For many, the after-tax benefit cost of paying a modified mortgage payment may not be significantly more than paying for a "foreclosure defense"
Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
A person may pursue a mortgage modification on their own or with the assistance of an attorney. In some cases, it may be appropriate to file for the mortgage modification as part of the Bankruptcy Court' Mortgage Modification Mediation ("MMM") program. If the second mortgage is wholly "underwater," the homeowner would often be able "lien strip" or avoid it as part of his chapter 13 plan.
Possible Rising Real Estate Price and Interest Rates
A homeowner may be making a error in not taking the opportunity to modify their mortgage based on present real estate values and interest rates. Real estate prices and interest rates may be rise, causing the new modification payment to be higher the longer a person waits to pursue a modification.
Also, if a person who has a first and second mortgage, it would be better to address their situation before there is a rise is in real estate prices. If the second mortgage is wholly "underwater", it may be avoidable in a bankruptcy case. If real estate prices go up enough that the second mortgage is not wholly "underwater," the second mortgage could not be avoided at all.
"Winning" Foreclosure
There may not exist much of a thing as "winning" a foreclosure case. For many, simply getting a foreclosure case dismissed, "with" or "without" prejudice may not be much of a "win". In most instances, a new foreclosure action may be filed on a new default almost immediately.
For example, "winning" a foreclosure case by getting the case dismissed may not be much of a "win" - it may only mean that the lender can simply file another case.
Statute of Limitations
Even if the statute of limitations has run to bring a foreclosure action on the mortgage note, generally the mortgage note remains valid and the mortgage and its liens remains valid. The continued validity of the mortgage and its lien is governed by the time period set forth in the statute of repose - which is different than the statute of limitations.
Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
The issuance by the Floirda Third District Court of Appeals in Miami of the recent decision in Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, etc. v. Harry Beauvais, et al., Case No. 3D14-575, may be an appropriate time to review what actions a Miami homeowner that seeks to save their home from foreclosure. If upheld, the Court's decision may indicate that some notions of "foreclosure defense" may need to be reviewed.
A homeowner seeking to save their home from foreclosure may be better served on directing his or her efforts towards the modification of their mortgage instead of "winning" a foreclosure case. For example, it appears that in many or most cases, arguments regarding statute of limitations issues may not result in a "quiet title" judgment.
Present Modification Opportunities
If a homeowner seeks to save their home from foreclosure, focusing primarily on "foreclosure defense" is not likely to be the solution. The federal government, the mortgage lenders, and the general economic climate, present good opportunities to modify your mortgage that may not exist in years to come. For many, the after-tax benefit cost of paying a modified mortgage payment may not be significantly more than paying for a "foreclosure defense"
Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
A person may pursue a mortgage modification on their own or with the assistance of an attorney. In some cases, it may be appropriate to file for the mortgage modification as part of the Bankruptcy Court' Mortgage Modification Mediation ("MMM") program. If the second mortgage is wholly "underwater," the homeowner would often be able "lien strip" or avoid it as part of his chapter 13 plan.
Possible Rising Real Estate Price and Interest Rates
A homeowner may be making a error in not taking the opportunity to modify their mortgage based on present real estate values and interest rates. Real estate prices and interest rates may be rise, causing the new modification payment to be higher the longer a person waits to pursue a modification.
Also, if a person who has a first and second mortgage, it would be better to address their situation before there is a rise is in real estate prices. If the second mortgage is wholly "underwater", it may be avoidable in a bankruptcy case. If real estate prices go up enough that the second mortgage is not wholly "underwater," the second mortgage could not be avoided at all.
"Winning" Foreclosure
There may not exist much of a thing as "winning" a foreclosure case. For many, simply getting a foreclosure case dismissed, "with" or "without" prejudice may not be much of a "win". In most instances, a new foreclosure action may be filed on a new default almost immediately.
For example, "winning" a foreclosure case by getting the case dismissed may not be much of a "win" - it may only mean that the lender can simply file another case.
Statute of Limitations
Even if the statute of limitations has run to bring a foreclosure action on the mortgage note, generally the mortgage note remains valid and the mortgage and its liens remains valid. The continued validity of the mortgage and its lien is governed by the time period set forth in the statute of repose - which is different than the statute of limitations.
Jordan E. Bublick - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - Kendall & Aventura Offices - (305) 891-4055 - www.bublicklaw.com
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Bank of America v. Caulkett, No. 13-1421, together with Bank of America v. Toledo-Cardona, No. 14-163, holding unanimously that a Chapter 7 bankruptcy debtor cannot “strip off” a junior lien.
Lien stripping takes place when there are two or more liens on a property, and the senior lien is “underwater” in that the amount owed on the senior lien is greater than the value of the property. In a Chapter 13 case a property owner can strip off the junior lien, resulting in it being treated as unsecured debt in the bankruptcy.
In these cases, the Court held that a Chapter 7 debtor may not void a junior lien under 11 U.S.C. § 506(d) when the debt owed on a senior lien exceeds the current value of the collateral if the junior creditor’s claim is both secured by a lien and allowed under § 502 of the Bankruptcy Code. Read More ›
Tags: Chapter 13, Chapter 7, U.S. Supreme Court
Susanne Soederberg, a professor of political studies and global development studies at Queen’s University in Canada, is calling for the student loan industry to be, “revealed, attacked, and uprooted.”
In her article on Dollars & Sense, Soederberg says the educational finance is not part of the natural order of things. Rather, it’s part of the poverty industry, which
includes educational lending, but extends to other forms of consumer credit—such as payday loans, credit cards, sub-prime housing loans—all of which feed off of and reproduce marginalization and insecurity. The increasing reliance on expensive personal loans to replace or augment wages—as well as obtain an education—is not a natural phenomenon. Rather, it is a social construction that needs be revealed, attacked, and uprooted, not negotiated within the territory of consumer protection, which is sponsored by the debtfare state and the capitalist interests it represents.
The debtfare state, a term apparently coined by Soederberg, is what she calls a new feature of governance that exists alongside the welfare state. The system uses a set of institutional and ideological practices aimed at
regulating and normalizing the growing dependence on expensive consumer credit to meet basic needs, such as education. Personal bankruptcy law is a core regulatory feature of debtfarism, as it acts to deal with defaults in the student loan industry and to ensure the legal and moral obligation of debt—regardless of the borrower’s ability to repay.
In other words, the government creates a new set of laws that’s designed to keep people in debt except in only the most extreme of situations.
By creating a safety valve in the form of bankruptcy the government can punish people by forcing them into bankruptcy as it ignores the fact that it created the regulatory scheme that made it inevitable that people would need the help in the first place.
It’s akin to a diet drug manufacturer going out and buying a cupcake factory to ensure that it has enough customers who want to buy the diet drug.
Leave it to a Canadian to see things clearly.
Banks lend money to people who have been sold on the American Dream of higher education as a ticket to wealth and stability.
The more those people borrow, the more money the banks make. And the less likely they are to repay the debt, the more the bank can charge in interest to those who do make their payments.
In addition, those who fail to pay are subject to lawsuits and judgments, which lead in many cases to wage garnishments and bank account levies.
This, in turn, forces more of the population to rely on credit cards as a way to make ends meet. Here, again, the banks make more money.
All this happens as those who originally sought a way to a better financial future are kept down economically and sociologically.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. And that makes the rich happier.
Now we’ve got the bankruptcy problem. If we make it too easy for people to discharge their student loans in bankruptcy then more will do so. Banks won’t make as much money, and investors will go elsewhere.
Now, according to Soederberg’s theory, is where the government steps in by creating a series of consumer protection laws. By making relief available at a price (credit standing, money, negative connotations due to societal attitudes), the government is able to show that help is available … to an extent. With respect to student loans, the relief available in the bankruptcy law is so narrowly available as to be worthless.
With bankruptcy safely out of the picture, people remain indebted and the cycle continues. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
It’s an interesting read, and I recommend it highly if for no other reason than as a window into a possible different way of thinking.
Photo credit: fleschmanpix/Flickr
The post Student Loans, Debtfare and the Poverty Industry appeared first on Bankruptcy and Student Loan Lawyers - 866.787.8078.
Updated daily, this blog will keep you informed on the latest bankruptcy news! 
Learn more about how Bankruptcy works and what you need to know.