Blogs

10 years 11 months ago

"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


10 years 11 months ago

"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


10 years 5 months ago

"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


10 years 12 months ago

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.


10 years 12 months ago

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.


10 years 12 months ago

  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.


10 years 12 months ago

young medical doctor in hospital
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.


10 years 12 months ago

Cheap Bankruptcy.jpg
It costs a lot of money to go broke, literally.  Chapter 7 fees vary from case to case, but the average case filed in Nebraska ranges from $1,200 to $1,500 depending on the complexity of the case and the attorney hired.  Clients frequently ask if their case can be filed before all fees are paid.  The clear answer to this question is no.  Bankruptcy laws simply do not allow an attorney to accept payment of Chapter 7 legal fees after the case is filed.
A recent case involving Louisiana bankruptcy attorney Glay Collier underscores this rigid rule.  Collier advertised a “No Money Down Chapter 7” where he would charge $100 before the case was filed and then debit his client’s bank account for the remaining fees to be paid after the case was filed.  It goes without saying, an attorney can file a lot of cases for no money down, and Collier did just that.  Unfortunately, when a client failed to make the monthly payment Collier retaliated by failing to file necessary documents and the case was dismissed.  The client hired another attorney and sought damages. 

The Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier

In a thundering opinion, the Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier for multiple violations of the bankruptcy code.  The Court also referred the case to the Chief Judge of Louisiana for a determination of further sanctions and possible disbarment.  The Court ruled that the “Credit/Debit Authorization From” signed by the debtor prior to filing the bankruptcy case could not be used after the case was filed since that form became void the moment the case was filed.   Once the case was filed the bank account debits ceased to be voluntary and were thus deemed a violation of the bankruptcy stay.
The United States Trustee recently filed a complaint against Colorado attorney Kevin Heupel for his firm’s use of a “no money down” program.  Heupel doubled the price of his service for the No Money Down option and required clients to sign a bank account debit agreement before the bankruptcy case was filed.  Without any court authorization, Heupel zapped money out of his client’s bank accounts right after the bankruptcy was filed and failed to report the full amount of his fees.  The US Trustee’s complaint alleged that debtors were not informed that continuation of the payments were voluntary and required a court-approved Reaffirmation Agreement to be valid.  Heupel also did not inform his clients of the impermissible conflict of interest that prevents a bankruptcy attorney from being a creditor in his client’s case.  As a result of the US Trustee’s complaint and media attention to the case, Kevin Heupel recently filed for Chapter 11 protection.

This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time.

So what does a person do if they absolutely have to file a bankruptcy case now because 25% of their paycheck is being garnished?  The best answer is to file Chapter 13.  Yes, Chapter 13 is a 3 to 5 year payment plan, but a Chapter 13 case can be filed in Nebraska for as little as $75 down. (Local Nebraska bankruptcy rules require at least $75 of the $310 court fees to be paid when the case is filed, with the remainder due in a reasonable time.)  Also, if more than $600 of a debtor’s paycheck has been garnished in the 90 days prior to filing, that money can generally be recovered by filing a turnover action, thus providing the necessary funds to fully pay attorney fees to convert the case to Chapter 7.  This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time (provided the debtor was eligible for Chapter 7 when the case was filed). 
No money down Chapter 7?  Nope, can’t do that.  Pay $75 down for Chapter 13 and flip to a Chapter 7 after payment of remaining court fees and attorney fees are paid?  Yes, that may be an option.  If debts are out of control there is always a way to figure out the legal fees.  If lawsuits have been filed there are ways to delay the judgments.  If bank accounts have been hit with garnishments there are ways to exempt the funds.  Never assume you can’t afford to go broke.
Image courtesy of Flckr & Kevin Dooley.


10 years 8 months ago

Cheap Bankruptcy.jpg
It costs a lot of money to go broke, literally.  Chapter 7 fees vary from case to case, but the average case filed in Nebraska ranges from $1,200 to $1,500 depending on the complexity of the case and the attorney hired.  Clients frequently ask if their case can be filed before all fees are paid.  The clear answer to this question is no.  Bankruptcy laws simply do not allow an attorney to accept payment of Chapter 7 legal fees after the case is filed.
A recent case involving Louisiana bankruptcy attorney Glay Collier underscores this rigid rule.  Collier advertised a “No Money Down Chapter 7” where he would charge $100 before the case was filed and then debit his client’s bank account for the remaining fees to be paid after the case was filed.  It goes without saying, an attorney can file a lot of cases for no money down, and Collier did just that.  Unfortunately, when a client failed to make the monthly payment Collier retaliated by failing to file necessary documents and the case was dismissed.  The client hired another attorney and sought damages. 

The Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier

In a thundering opinion, the Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier for multiple violations of the bankruptcy code.  The Court also referred the case to the Chief Judge of Louisiana for a determination of further sanctions and possible disbarment.  The Court ruled that the “Credit/Debit Authorization From” signed by the debtor prior to filing the bankruptcy case could not be used after the case was filed since that form became void the moment the case was filed.   Once the case was filed the bank account debits ceased to be voluntary and were thus deemed a violation of the bankruptcy stay.
The United States Trustee recently filed a complaint against Colorado attorney Kevin Heupel for his firm’s use of a “no money down” program.  Heupel doubled the price of his service for the No Money Down option and required clients to sign a bank account debit agreement before the bankruptcy case was filed.  Without any court authorization, Heupel zapped money out of his client’s bank accounts right after the bankruptcy was filed and failed to report the full amount of his fees.  The US Trustee’s complaint alleged that debtors were not informed that continuation of the payments were voluntary and required a court-approved Reaffirmation Agreement to be valid.  Heupel also did not inform his clients of the impermissible conflict of interest that prevents a bankruptcy attorney from being a creditor in his client’s case.  As a result of the US Trustee’s complaint and media attention to the case, Kevin Heupel recently filed for Chapter 11 protection.

This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time.

So what does a person do if they absolutely have to file a bankruptcy case now because 25% of their paycheck is being garnished?  The best answer is to file Chapter 13.  Yes, Chapter 13 is a 3 to 5 year payment plan, but a Chapter 13 case can be filed in Nebraska for as little as $75 down. (Local Nebraska bankruptcy rules require at least $75 of the $310 court fees to be paid when the case is filed, with the remainder due in a reasonable time.)  Also, if more than $600 of a debtor’s paycheck has been garnished in the 90 days prior to filing, that money can generally be recovered by filing a turnover action, thus providing the necessary funds to fully pay attorney fees to convert the case to Chapter 7.  This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time (provided the debtor was eligible for Chapter 7 when the case was filed). 
No money down Chapter 7?  Nope, can’t do that.  Pay $75 down for Chapter 13 and flip to a Chapter 7 after payment of remaining court fees and attorney fees are paid?  Yes, that may be an option.  If debts are out of control there is always a way to figure out the legal fees.  If lawsuits have been filed there are ways to delay the judgments.  If bank accounts have been hit with garnishments there are ways to exempt the funds.  Never assume you can’t afford to go broke.
Image courtesy of Flckr & Kevin Dooley.


10 years 8 months ago

Cheap Bankruptcy.jpg
It costs a lot of money to go broke, literally.  Chapter 7 fees vary from case to case, but the average case filed in Nebraska ranges from $1,200 to $1,500 depending on the complexity of the case and the attorney hired.  Clients frequently ask if their case can be filed before all fees are paid.  The clear answer to this question is no.  Bankruptcy laws simply do not allow an attorney to accept payment of Chapter 7 legal fees after the case is filed.
A recent case involving Louisiana bankruptcy attorney Glay Collier underscores this rigid rule.  Collier advertised a “No Money Down Chapter 7” where he would charge $100 before the case was filed and then debit his client’s bank account for the remaining fees to be paid after the case was filed.  It goes without saying, an attorney can file a lot of cases for no money down, and Collier did just that.  Unfortunately, when a client failed to make the monthly payment Collier retaliated by failing to file necessary documents and the case was dismissed.  The client hired another attorney and sought damages. 

The Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier

In a thundering opinion, the Louisiana bankruptcy court imposed $40,000 of sanctions and damages against attorney Collier for multiple violations of the bankruptcy code.  The Court also referred the case to the Chief Judge of Louisiana for a determination of further sanctions and possible disbarment.  The Court ruled that the “Credit/Debit Authorization From” signed by the debtor prior to filing the bankruptcy case could not be used after the case was filed since that form became void the moment the case was filed.   Once the case was filed the bank account debits ceased to be voluntary and were thus deemed a violation of the bankruptcy stay.
The United States Trustee recently filed a complaint against Colorado attorney Kevin Heupel for his firm’s use of a “no money down” program.  Heupel doubled the price of his service for the No Money Down option and required clients to sign a bank account debit agreement before the bankruptcy case was filed.  Without any court authorization, Heupel zapped money out of his client’s bank accounts right after the bankruptcy was filed and failed to report the full amount of his fees.  The US Trustee’s complaint alleged that debtors were not informed that continuation of the payments were voluntary and required a court-approved Reaffirmation Agreement to be valid.  Heupel also did not inform his clients of the impermissible conflict of interest that prevents a bankruptcy attorney from being a creditor in his client’s case.  As a result of the US Trustee’s complaint and media attention to the case, Kevin Heupel recently filed for Chapter 11 protection.

This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time.

So what does a person do if they absolutely have to file a bankruptcy case now because 25% of their paycheck is being garnished?  The best answer is to file Chapter 13.  Yes, Chapter 13 is a 3 to 5 year payment plan, but a Chapter 13 case can be filed in Nebraska for as little as $75 down. (Local Nebraska bankruptcy rules require at least $75 of the $310 court fees to be paid when the case is filed, with the remainder due in a reasonable time.)  Also, if more than $600 of a debtor’s paycheck has been garnished in the 90 days prior to filing, that money can generally be recovered by filing a turnover action, thus providing the necessary funds to fully pay attorney fees to convert the case to Chapter 7.  This is a key point:  Chapter 13 cases can be converted to Chapter 7 at any time (provided the debtor was eligible for Chapter 7 when the case was filed). 
No money down Chapter 7?  Nope, can’t do that.  Pay $75 down for Chapter 13 and flip to a Chapter 7 after payment of remaining court fees and attorney fees are paid?  Yes, that may be an option.  If debts are out of control there is always a way to figure out the legal fees.  If lawsuits have been filed there are ways to delay the judgments.  If bank accounts have been hit with garnishments there are ways to exempt the funds.  Never assume you can’t afford to go broke.
Image courtesy of Flckr & Kevin Dooley.


Pages