Blogs
Gubernatorial candidate Nathan Deal is reeling after a U.S. bankruptcy judge ordered the reopening of a 2009 bankruptcy filing by Deal’s daughter Carrie Deal Wilder and his son-in-law Clint Wilder. A U.S. bankruptcy trustee sought to reopen the Wilders’ case after it was revealed that Clint Wilder was not eligible for a discharge of his... Read more »
The post Failure To Disclose Previous Bankruptcy Jeopardizes Discharge appeared first on Allmand Law Firm PLLC.
One of the things most people want to know when considering bankruptcy is how soon after filing bankruptcy can they obtain credit. The answer to this will vary from case to case but there is a relatively simple formula to follow. After your case is filed, you can apply immediately for a secured credit card.+ Read More
The post How To Build Credit After Bankruptcy appeared first on David M. Siegel.
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" - Latin for "after this, therefore because of this." This episode from West Wing assumes that at least one of the 27 lawyers in the room would know what it means. Even Sheldon in Bing Bang understands this logical fallacy and so does Spock.
Logical Fallacy
Wikipedia explains this is a logical fallacy of questionable causation, meaning that "since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X" and gives this example: "The rooster crows immediately before the sunrise, therefor the rooster causes the sun to rise." Here is a further explanation.
5th and 11th Circuit
Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2009) cites the 11th Circuit's explanation and use of this logical fallacy in McClain v. Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243 (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. 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." Gen. Elec. Co. v Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 145-46 (1997). Judge Moore of the Southern District cites McClain in the case of Kilpatrick v. Breg, Inc.,2009 WL 2058384 *9, (S.D. Fla. 2009).
Chapter 13 Context
The Court in In re Seger referred to this logical fallacy in the case of In re Seger, 444 B.R. 492 (Bank. D. Mass. 2011) regarding the administrative obligations of chapter 13 debtors who engage in business. The Court explained that while a
statement of receipts and disbursements may include receipts and disbursements reflected on a bank statement it will also include all other transactions . . . such as cash and credit card transactions. In fact, a statement of receipts and disbursements may be required even when there are no financial transactions whatsoever and there is no bank account.
More
Here is an explanation of further logical fallacies and critical thinking that would help a lawyer.
Jordan E. Bublick is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Cases and Mortgage Modifications (305) 891-4055
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" - Latin for the fallacy of reasoning of "after this, therefore because of this." President Bartlet in this episode from West Wing challenged the 27 lawyers in the room that at least one of them would know the meaning of this Latin phrase. Fortunately, a few of them did. Sheldon in this clip from the BigBang is also familiar with this logical fallacy.
Logical Fallacy
Spock explains this fallacy of reasoning very well here. In short, what Spock is saying is that "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 courts are on guard to avoid this logical fallacy. Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2009) cites the 11th Circuit's explanation of and avoidance of this logical fallacy in McClain v. Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243 (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. 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." Gen. Elec. Co. v Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 145-46 (1997). Judge Moore of the Southern District cites McClain in the case of Kilpatrick v. Breg, Inc.,2009 WL 2058384 *9, (S.D. Fla. 2009), which decision was upheld on appeal. Actually, the McClain case is a landmark decision in the world of "junk science" and toxic torts and product liability. This article reviews the related "pithy legalism" of Judge Richard Posner that the "the courtroom is not the place of scientific guesswork, even of the inspired sort. Law lags science; it does not lead it." Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 78 F.3d 316, 319 (7th Cir. 1996).
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 actually the Beatles do show that warn against 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 is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Cases and Mortgage Modifications (305) 891-4055
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" - Latin for the fallacy of reasoning of "after this, therefore because of this." President Bartlet in this episode from West Wing challenged the 27 lawyers in the room that at least one of them should know the meaning of this Latin phrase. Fortunately, a few of them did. Sheldon in this clip from the Big Bang is also familiar with this logical fallacy.
Logical Fallacy
Spock explains this fallacy of reasoning very well here. In short, what Spock is saying is that "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 courts are on guard to avoid this logical fallacy. Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2009) cites the 11th Circuit's explanation of and avoidance of this logical fallacy in McClain v. Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243 (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. 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." Gen. Elec. Co. v Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 145-46 (1997). Judge Moore of the Southern District cites McClain in the case of Kilpatrick v. Breg, Inc.,2009 WL 2058384 *9, (S.D. Fla. 2009), which decision was upheld on appeal. Actually, the McClain case is a landmark decision in the world of "junk science" and toxic torts and product liability. This article reviews the related "pithy legalism" of Judge Richard Posner that the "the courtroom is not the place of scientific guesswork, even of the inspired sort. Law lags science; it does not lead it." Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 78 F.3d 316, 319 (7th Cir. 1996).
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 actually the Beatles do show that warn against 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 is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" - Latin for the fallacy of reasoning of "after this, therefore because of this." President Bartlet in this episode from West Wing challenged the 27 lawyers in the room that at lease one of them should know the meaning of this Latin phrase. Fortunately, a few of them sorta did. Sheldon in Big Bang also is familiar with this fallacy.
Logical FallacySpock explains this logical fallacy very well here. In short, what Spock is saying is that "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 courts are on guard to avoid this logical fallacy. Huss v. Gayden, 571 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2009) cites the 11th Circuit's explanation of and avoidance of this logical fallacy in McClain v. Metabolife International, Inc. 401 F.3d 1233, 1243 (11th Cir. 2005) in the determination of the admissibility of expert testimony under a Daubert analysis. 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." Gen. Elec. Co. v Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 145-46 (1997). McClain is a landmark decision in the world of "junk science" and toxic torts and product liability.
Judge Richard Posner wrote a "pithy legalism" that the "the courtroom is not the place of scientific guesswork, even of the inspired sort. Law lags science; it does not lead it." Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 78 F.3d 316, 319 (7th Cir. 1996) his Article
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
When the bankruptcy laws were changed on October 17, 2005, there was an effort to curb abusive filings. To do so, a means test was authored utilizing IRS standards for acceptable expenses. In addition to the means test, there were requirements such as having completed a credit counseling session before a case can be filed+ Read More
The post Interesting Development in Some Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Cases appeared first on David M. Siegel.
Dismissing and Re-filing a Chapter 13 There are certain circumstances where you may want to dismiss your chapter 13 case and refile. You do have the ability to do this. There are certain circumstances where you may have to wait six months to refile. This would be the case where you want to dismiss the+ Read More
The post Can I Dismiss My Bankruptcy & Refile? appeared first on David M. Siegel.
This is the bankruptcy case study for Todd, from Steger, Illinois, and his wife Emily. The couple is considering chapter 7 or chapter 13 bankruptcy, but is not sure which chapter is best for them. Let’s explore the details. The couple owns a home in Steger, Illinois with a market value of approximately $110,000.+ Read More
The post Can We Save Our Home With Bankruptcy? appeared first on David M. Siegel.
When you think about the student loan crisis, your mind conjures up images of twenty-somethings working at Starbucks. What you don’t see, however, are the hundreds of thousands of hard-working professionals who pull in comfortable salaries yet live in fear of their student loans.
Confused about how such a thing could possibly happen, and why those with deep pockets aren’t always on top of their student loan payments?
Consider this: most people do not graduate from school with high-paying jobs in place. Doctors in particular work many years before getting that fat paycheck. In fact, your friendly local physician likely spent a decade or better in a residency program, living like a college student.
Professionals of all stripes pay their dues for years, during which time they are just as unable to pay their student loans as any other college graduate. By the time their personal finance situation turns a corner, it’s too late to get back on the horse.
You see, federal student loans come with only so much in the way of forbearance. Once they’re gone, you can’t get another one.
So you fall behind on the student loan tab only to be told about consolidation for the federal loans (you can’t consolidate the private student loans unless you qualify based on your credit score). But once you consolidate, you can’t do it again – which leaves you saddled with a new loan that may have an interest rate too high to afford on your still-meager salary.
If you fall behind and go into default, you can catch up on your federal student loans by rehabilitating the payments (again, no such luck with the private student loans). But once again, you can rehabilitate your student loans only one time. Hit another bump in the road and you’ve got no recourse.
By the time your income rises enough to start paying the student loans, you’re faced with coughing up a huge chunk of change to cure a default or, in the case, of a federal student loan in default for a second time, the entire balance.
That can run tens of thousands of dollars for some, hundreds of thousands for others. Confronted with the lack of options, even the wealthiest of student loan borrowers can’t catch up on their payments as this story by WABC shows.
So next time you see a wealthy doctor, dentist or other professional don’t be shocked to find out you have something in common – a big student loan bill.
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.