This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request your
input....it'll make sense in a second...

This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meeting
in late December.

She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show
(good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing and
such.

I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later after
her filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable by
the bankruptcy, right?

Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on this
show, it pays out as follows:

$100,000 within 30 days of show

$500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and

$500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years.

The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerable
to an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a
"reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K was
dispersed, it might also be attachable.....

But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since that
doesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free and
clear, right??

(of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell the
rights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....how
would THAT be affected??)

And if your friend does win 10 million they have a problem paying back
a few?

Your friend is just kidding themselves.

What if you friend wins, but dies in the process can they still spend
the money? That is will they bury the money with the coffin?

And I might when the lottery too. Face the facts, it isn't going to happen
so don't worry about it.
"Lise Michaels" <arilysnc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:61f22036.0402170532.74a1dead@posting.google.c om... This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request your input....it'll make sense in a second... This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meeting in late December. She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show (good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing and such. I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later after her filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable by the bankruptcy, right? Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on this show, it pays out as follows: $100,000 within 30 days of show $500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and $500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years. The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerable to an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a "reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K was dispersed, it might also be attachable..... But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since that doesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free and clear, right?? (of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell the rights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....how would THAT be affected??)

They will only take as much as she discharged plus perhaps some fees so what's
to think about?

moe




arilysnc@yahoo.com (Lise Michaels) wrote:This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request yourinput....it'll make sense in a second...This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meetingin late December.She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show(good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing andsuch.I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later afterher filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable bythe bankruptcy, right?Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on thisshow, it pays out as follows:$100,000 within 30 days of show$500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and$500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years.The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerableto an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a"reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K wasdispersed, it might also be attachable.....But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since thatdoesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free andclear, right??(of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell therights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....howwould THAT be affected??)

actually, it isn't that utterly implausible (something similar
happened to a Price is Right contestant a few years back, plus the TX
lotto winners a few years back were on verge of filing a farm
bankruptcy).

So how WOULD it be affected because of Chapter 7? In this specific
case, she had to discharge about 400K of medical bills, so it WOULD be
a "big deal" that would be relevant.....



moe <moe@nomoe.com> wrote in message news:<4033b8a9$0$148$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>... They will only take as much as she discharged plus perhaps some fees so what's to think about? moe arilysnc@yahoo.com (Lise Michaels) wrote:This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request yourinput....it'll make sense in a second...This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meetingin late December.She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show(good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing andsuch.I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later afterher filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable bythe bankruptcy, right?Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on thisshow, it pays out as follows:$100,000 within 30 days of show$500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and$500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years.The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerableto an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a"reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K wasdispersed, it might also be attachable.....But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since thatdoesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free andclear, right??(of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell therights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....howwould THAT be affected??)

What is the problem? If you suddenly have tens of millions of
dollars, why wouldn't you pay your creditors?

Your posts simply do not make any sense.



arilysnc@yahoo.com (Lise Michaels) wrote in message news:<61f22036.0402191144.3cfef144@posting.google.com>... actually, it isn't that utterly implausible (something similar happened to a Price is Right contestant a few years back, plus the TX lotto winners a few years back were on verge of filing a farm bankruptcy). So how WOULD it be affected because of Chapter 7? In this specific case, she had to discharge about 400K of medical bills, so it WOULD be a "big deal" that would be relevant..... moe <moe@nomoe.com> wrote in message news:<4033b8a9$0$148$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>... They will only take as much as she discharged plus perhaps some fees so what's to think about? moe arilysnc@yahoo.com (Lise Michaels) wrote:This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request yourinput....it'll make sense in a second...This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meetingin late December.She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show(good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing andsuch.I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later afterher filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable bythe bankruptcy, right?Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on thisshow, it pays out as follows:$100,000 within 30 days of show$500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and$500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years.The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerableto an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a"reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K wasdispersed, it might also be attachable.....But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since thatdoesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free andclear, right??(of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell therights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....howwould THAT be affected??)

"K Kim" <klm_kim@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f66f76cf.0402191447.496b20c@posting.google.co m... What is the problem? If you suddenly have tens of millions of dollars, why wouldn't you pay your creditors? Your posts simply do not make any sense.

Kim,

It sounds to me like this person, were she to get a huge windfall, simply
doesn't WANT to surrender it to the BK trustee.

It's simple greed, and a desire to avoid the consequences of one's actions,
nothing more.


PWB

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:47:29 -0500, PWB <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.wideopenNOSPAMwest.com> wrote:
: It sounds to me like this person, were she to get a huge windfall, simply
: doesn't WANT to surrender it to the BK trustee.

Whether she ought to or aside, does this person HAVE to surrender it?
What do you think?

Even $400,000.00 wouldn't be a big deal out of $10,000,000.00

Lise Michaels wrote: actually, it isn't that utterly implausible (something similar happened to a Price is Right contestant a few years back, plus the TX lotto winners a few years back were on verge of filing a farm bankruptcy). So how WOULD it be affected because of Chapter 7? In this specific case, she had to discharge about 400K of medical bills, so it WOULD be a "big deal" that would be relevant..... moe <moe@nomoe.com> wrote in message news:<4033b8a9$0$148$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>...They will only take as much as she discharged plus perhaps some fees so what'sto think about?moearilysnc@yahoo.com (Lise Michaels) wrote:This *might* happen to a friend of mine, so I request yourinput....it'll make sense in a second...This person filed chapter 7 around Thanksgiving, had the 341 meetingin late December.She is hoping to get on this new incarnation of the Millionaire show(good luck), but wonders how it would be affected by her filing andsuch.I presume that if she gets "windfall" money six months and later afterher filing (May 24 in her case) that is "her" money, untouchable bythe bankruptcy, right?Here is the kicker. If someone actually wins the ten million on thisshow, it pays out as follows:$100,000 within 30 days of show$500,000 more within some time frame (a few months?) and$500,000 more each year for the next nineteen years.The way I would "guess" is that the first hundred grand is vulnerableto an extent (it isn't THAT much money, so might fall within a"reasonable salary?" Then depending when the first 500K wasdispersed, it might also be attachable.....But what about the subsequent 500K over the next 19 years? Since thatdoesn't become "in hand" until the payouts, that should be free andclear, right??(of course, this doesn't address if she would decide to "sell therights to the annuity" or something a few months down the line.....howwould THAT be affected??)

they don't make sense, cause you ain't reading with much comprehensive
ability...<B-)

The setup of that "prize" is NOT "win ten million, right then." It
parcels out, over 20 years. If one declared Chapter 7 with 400K in
debt, it would pretty much absorb the first year and a half of
"disbursements."

Plus, read between the lines, genius....this was a "medically related"
bankruptcy (remember the earlier post?) Since this is pretyt much the
only westernized nation without national health care, why should
someone have to suffer because of the insufficiencies of that system?

"PWB" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.wideopenNOSPAMwest.com> wrote in message news:<Ho2dncN54qh-kqvdRVn-vw@wideopenwest.com>... "K Kim" <klm_kim@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:f66f76cf.0402191447.496b20c@posting.google.co m... What is the problem? If you suddenly have tens of millions of dollars, why wouldn't you pay your creditors? Your posts simply do not make any sense. Kim,

Off topic

Maybe this person should move to Canada, Australia or a bevy of other
countries then. ^_^ Chances are in one of those countries they wouldn't get
the care needed in a timely manner either. Granted our "system" isn't the
best, but I'd rather be here instead of anywhere else!

On topic

Isn't there a time frame after the discharge they can still take
money/property? Meaning after the six month time frame of getting the
discharge notice, they can still attach to it.

If this person does win and it's in that time frame, they just need to suck
it up and deal with it. Sure... it would suck to lose some of the winnings,
but come on. There would still be 18 years left and they didn't have to pay
out of pocket (really).



----- Original Message -----
From: "Lise Michaels" <arilysnc@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.bankruptcy
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: "windfall winnings" after 341 meeting


SNIP
Plus, read between the lines, genius....this was a "medically related" bankruptcy (remember the earlier post?) Since this is pretyt much the only westernized nation without national health care, why should someone have to suffer because of the insufficiencies of that system?

SNIP

Actually, the only property which can be acquired after the petition
date and still become property of the estate is something inherited or
obtained through a divorce within 180 day after the case is filed.

If your friend had some potential right to the prize before filing,
but didn't find out she was a winner until after, the prize would be
an aset of the estate. But if she goes on the show and wins after the
case is filed, the only thing that might force her to use her winnings
to pay creditors is her conscience.

But if she's going on reality TV, she probably doesn't have one.

The applicable section of the bankruptcy code is 541(a)(5),
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/541.html, which states:

The commencement of a [bankruptcy] case...creates an estate. Such estate is
comprised of all the following property, wherever located and by whomever
held:

....
(5)

Any interest in property that would have been property of the estate if such
interest had been an interest of the debtor on the date of the filing of the
petition, and that the debtor acquires or becomes entitled to acquire within
180 days after such date -

(A)

by bequest, devise, or inheritance;

(B)

as a result of a property settlement agreement with the debtor's spouse, or
of an interlocutory or final divorce decree; or

(C)

as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy or of a death benefit plan.


Unless the debtor bought the lotto ticket before he/she filed, I don't see
that the winnings would be subject to attachment by the trustee at all.

--
Brett

************************************************** ***************
* Personal Injury/Malpractice Bankruptcy *
* *
* BRETT WEISS, P.C. *
* Attorneys at Law *
* Maryland, D.C. and Federal Bars *
* lawyer@brettweiss.com *
* www.brettweiss.com *
* *
* Small Business Estates & Estate Planning *
************************************************** ***************

The Small Print: This response is for discussion purposes only. It isn't
meant to be legal advice and you shouldn't treat it as such. If you want
legal advice, speak with a local lawyer familiar with your state's laws who
can review *all* of the facts and the law applicable to your situation.
************************************************** ***************

"JA" <kkci@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:EhwZb.23222$Ol.11824@newssvr24.news.prodigy.c om... Off topic Maybe this person should move to Canada, Australia or a bevy of other countries then. ^_^ Chances are in one of those countries they wouldn't
get the care needed in a timely manner either. Granted our "system" isn't the best, but I'd rather be here instead of anywhere else! On topic Isn't there a time frame after the discharge they can still take money/property? Meaning after the six month time frame of getting the discharge notice, they can still attach to it. If this person does win and it's in that time frame, they just need to
suck it up and deal with it. Sure... it would suck to lose some of the
winnings, but come on. There would still be 18 years left and they didn't have to
pay out of pocket (really). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lise Michaels" <arilysnc@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: alt.bankruptcy Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 3:52 PM Subject: Re: "windfall winnings" after 341 meeting SNIP Plus, read between the lines, genius....this was a "medically related" bankruptcy (remember the earlier post?) Since this is pretyt much the only westernized nation without national health care, why should someone have to suffer because of the insufficiencies of that system? SNIP

Mahibab Habisinski <withmyvirgins@heavens.net> wrote in message news:<40368015.6090601@heavens.net>... Even $400,000.00 wouldn't be a big deal out of $10,000,000.00


I agree that that person does not deserve sympathy from anyone. A
debt is a debt. It does not matter how that debt is occurred, medical
or not. That person is trying to blame the government for the debts.

If that person does not like the US system, he/she is welcome to move
out or vote to change to a new government. Let me point out that very
few countries have liberal BK laws as the US does.

"Howard Goldstein" <hgoldste@mpcs.com> wrote in message
news:1077285829.53251@news.queue.to... On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:47:29 -0500, PWB
<NOSPAM@NOSPAM.wideopenNOSPAMwest.com> wrote: : It sounds to me like this person, were she to get a huge windfall,
simply : doesn't WANT to surrender it to the BK trustee. Whether she ought to or aside, does this person HAVE to surrender it? What do you think?

If it falls within the six month period post-petition, yes.


PWB

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:26:04 -0500, PWB <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.wideopenNOSPAMwest.com> wrote:
: "Howard Goldstein" <hgoldste@mpcs.com> wrote in message
: news:1077285829.53251@news.queue.to...
: > Whether she ought to or aside, does this person HAVE to surrender it?
: > What do you think?
:
: If it falls within the six month period post-petition, yes.

Have you run across caselaw supporting that position?

sarpon6@hotmail.com (sarpon) wrote in message >...
Actually, the only property which can be acquired after the petition date and still become property of the estate is something inherited or obtained through a divorce within 180 day after the case is filed.

Hmmmm, this really rings a bell. But it seems to contradict a lot of
the other assessments of Brett and the others.

It *IS* an intriguing situation, like on a law school exam. Since
that new "Super Millionaire" wasn't even ANNOUNCED till about two
weeks ago (in other words, about 3.5 MONTHS after the person filed
Chapter 7), obviously he/she didn't have ANY kind of "expectation" or
"anticipation" going on. Plus even being on the show isn't any kind
of guarantee you will WIN anything!

klm_kim@yahoo.com (K Kim) wrote in message I agree that that person does not deserve sympathy from anyone. A debt is a debt. It does not matter how that debt is occurred, medical or not. That person is trying to blame the government for the debts. If that person does not like the US system, he/she is welcome to move out or vote to change to a new government. Let me point out that very few countries have liberal BK laws as the US does.

If the bankruptcy was medically related, because of a failing of the
government in providing coverage, that seems to go to the heart of her
point.

It is worth noting that most of those "terrible socialist" countries
like Sweden, Norway, Denmark that have awesome govennment health care,
education benefits and the like are VERY difficult to immigrate
to....and have relatively low rates of people moving HERE from THERE,
nowadays.

Wasn't it PJ O'Rourke who wrote a few years back, that even on a
TOURIST visit to Sweden, you could have a ton of super low cost health
care/dental care? Pretty sweet!

Here would be the way *I* would look at it....if she was going to
forfeit just about the whole prize because of the bankruptcy, why try
to get on the show in the FIRST place?

But having said that, what prevents the following:

--win the big prize, then before just about anything "legal" can
trigger, purchase a house for cash (maybe in Florida or a place like
that with odd homestead exemptions). Then:

1) Immediately get a home equity loan at a very low rate.

2) Pay off the debtors from the bankruptcy estate.

--so this gets rid of the bills, right? Plus

--lets you pay off the bills over 20 or 30 years, at a very low
interest rate, which will also be....

--TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

Think that would work?






sarpon6@hotmail.com (sarpon) wrote in message
If your friend had some potential right to the prize before filing, but didn't find out she was a winner until after, the prize would be an aset of the estate. But if she goes on the show and wins after the case is filed, the only thing that might force her to use her winnings to pay creditors is her conscience. But if she's going on reality TV, she probably doesn't have one.

So Brett, the way I would read that is, assuming a Chapter 7 filing on
(say) December 10, 2004, and a 341 hearing on Feb 1, 2004....."no
asset case"--that in ALL the following cases, the "winnings" would NOT
be a part of the bankruptcy estate:

1) person appears on that show tomorow night, say, and wins the 10
mill, then gets $100,000 in a week; then 500K in about a month; then
500K a year for the next 19 years?

2) Person goes out tonight, buys a Texas Lotto ticket in Houston, and
wins the whole thing this Wednesday night.

3) A real estate salesperson, who this afternoon gets a contract for
a ten million dollar property (say a $250,000 commission to them) and
it closes and gets them that money in early April, 2004?

--in short, is it accurate to say that only in *limited* circumstances
is money "earned" *after* filing the petition vulnerable to being
included in the estate??


"Brett Weiss" <lawyer@erols.com> wrote:

The applicable section of the bankruptcy code is 541(a)(5), http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/541.html, which states: The commencement of a [bankruptcy] case...creates an estate.......

.....and that the debtor acquires or becomes entitled to acquire within 180 days after such date - (A) by bequest, devise, or inheritance; (B) as a result of a property settlement agreement with the debtor's spouse, or of an interlocutory or final divorce decree; or (C) as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy or of a death benefit plan. Unless the debtor bought the lotto ticket before he/she filed, I don't see that the winnings would be subject to attachment by the trustee at all. -- Brett

"Mitch" <mitchsm1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9569b011.0402230518.7f2c671a@posting.google.c om... So Brett, the way I would read that is, assuming a Chapter 7 filing on (say) December 10, 2004, and a 341 hearing on Feb 1, 2004....."no asset case"--that in ALL the following cases, the "winnings" would NOT be a part of the bankruptcy estate:

My .02: The date the lottery ticket was purchased is important. If the
ticket isn't property of the estate (was purchased after the case was filed)
the winnings are never going to be property of the estate. The 180 rule is
narrowly drafted to include property received by bequest, devise, or
inheritance, as a result of a property settlement agreement with the
debtor's spouse, or as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy or of a
death benefit plan. Lottery winnings are not within the statute.

On the other hand, if the lotter ticket was purchased prior to filing the
winnings are property of the estate regardless of when they are recieved.
The winnings would be subject to liquidation and distribution to creditors
to the extent that they are not exemptable under the laws of the state in
which the case was filed. 1) person appears on that show tomorow night, say, and wins the 10 mill, then gets $100,000 in a week; then 500K in about a month; then 500K a year for the next 19 years?

Post peition earnings, in a chapter 7 case, are never property of the
estate. 2) Person goes out tonight, buys a Texas Lotto ticket in Houston, and wins the whole thing this Wednesday night.

Not property of the estate. 3) A real estate salesperson, who this afternoon gets a contract for a ten million dollar property (say a $250,000 commission to them) and it closes and gets them that money in early April, 2004?

Not property of the estate. --in short, is it accurate to say that only in *limited* circumstances is money "earned" *after* filing the petition vulnerable to being included in the estate??

The Bankruptcy Code expressly defines what the property of the estate
includes. If the Code doesn't define the property as property of the
estate, there's nothing anyone can do (unless you happen to be a
congressperson). That said, if the trustee finds out that debtor won the
lottery before the case closed, I'd hope s/he would make a 707(b) motion to
dismiss the case. It's a substantial abuse of chapter 7 if debtor can
afford to repay.

I agree with you on all accounts.

--
Brett

************************************************** ***************
* Personal Injury/Malpractice Bankruptcy *
* *
* BRETT WEISS, P.C. *
* Attorneys at Law *
* Maryland, D.C. and Federal Bars *
* lawyer@brettweiss.com *
* www.brettweiss.com *
* *
* Small Business Estates & Estate Planning *
************************************************** ***************

The Small Print: This response is for discussion purposes only. It isn't
meant to be legal advice and you shouldn't treat it as such. If you want
legal advice, speak with a local lawyer familiar with your state's laws who
can review *all* of the facts and the law applicable to your situation.
************************************************** ***************

"Thoth" <thoth@notlisted.net> wrote in message
news:w6r_b.1472$qL1.850@fed1read02... "Mitch" <mitchsm1@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:9569b011.0402230518.7f2c671a@posting.google.c om... So Brett, the way I would read that is, assuming a Chapter 7 filing on (say) December 10, 2004, and a 341 hearing on Feb 1, 2004....."no asset case"--that in ALL the following cases, the "winnings" would NOT be a part of the bankruptcy estate: My .02: The date the lottery ticket was purchased is important. If the ticket isn't property of the estate (was purchased after the case was
filed) the winnings are never going to be property of the estate. The 180 rule
is narrowly drafted to include property received by bequest, devise, or inheritance, as a result of a property settlement agreement with the debtor's spouse, or as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy or of a death benefit plan. Lottery winnings are not within the statute. On the other hand, if the lotter ticket was purchased prior to filing the winnings are property of the estate regardless of when they are recieved. The winnings would be subject to liquidation and distribution to creditors to the extent that they are not exemptable under the laws of the state in which the case was filed. 1) person appears on that show tomorow night, say, and wins the 10 mill, then gets $100,000 in a week; then 500K in about a month; then 500K a year for the next 19 years? Post peition earnings, in a chapter 7 case, are never property of the estate. 2) Person goes out tonight, buys a Texas Lotto ticket in Houston, and wins the whole thing this Wednesday night. Not property of the estate. 3) A real estate salesperson, who this afternoon gets a contract for a ten million dollar property (say a $250,000 commission to them) and it closes and gets them that money in early April, 2004? Not property of the estate. --in short, is it accurate to say that only in *limited* circumstances is money "earned" *after* filing the petition vulnerable to being included in the estate?? The Bankruptcy Code expressly defines what the property of the estate includes. If the Code doesn't define the property as property of the estate, there's nothing anyone can do (unless you happen to be a congressperson). That said, if the trustee finds out that debtor won the lottery before the case closed, I'd hope s/he would make a 707(b) motion
to dismiss the case. It's a substantial abuse of chapter 7 if debtor can afford to repay.

Any good places to ask questions on canadian bankruptcy for individuals?
"Brett Weiss" <lawyer@erols.com> wrote in message
news:g4idneOrENgOq6TdRVn-sw@comcast.com... The applicable section of the bankruptcy code is 541(a)(5), http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/541.html, which states: The commencement of a [bankruptcy] case...creates an estate. Such estate
is comprised of all the following property, wherever located and by whomever held: ... (5) Any interest in property that would have been property of the estate if
such interest had been an interest of the debtor on the date of the filing of
the petition, and that the debtor acquires or becomes entitled to acquire
within 180 days after such date - (A) by bequest, devise, or inheritance; (B) as a result of a property settlement agreement with the debtor's spouse,
or of an interlocutory or final divorce decree; or (C) as a beneficiary of a life insurance policy or of a death benefit plan. Unless the debtor bought the lotto ticket before he/she filed, I don't see that the winnings would be subject to attachment by the trustee at all. -- Brett ************************************************** *************** * Personal Injury/Malpractice Bankruptcy * * * * BRETT WEISS, P.C. * * Attorneys at Law * * Maryland, D.C. and Federal Bars * * lawyer@brettweiss.com * * www.brettweiss.com * * * * Small Business Estates & Estate Planning * ************************************************** *************** The Small Print: This response is for discussion purposes only. It isn't meant to be legal advice and you shouldn't treat it as such. If you want legal advice, speak with a local lawyer familiar with your state's laws
who can review *all* of the facts and the law applicable to your situation. ************************************************** *************** "JA" <kkci@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:EhwZb.23222$Ol.11824@newssvr24.news.prodigy.c om... Off topic Maybe this person should move to Canada, Australia or a bevy of other countries then. ^_^ Chances are in one of those countries they wouldn't get the care needed in a timely manner either. Granted our "system" isn't
the best, but I'd rather be here instead of anywhere else! On topic Isn't there a time frame after the discharge they can still take money/property? Meaning after the six month time frame of getting the discharge notice, they can still attach to it. If this person does win and it's in that time frame, they just need to suck it up and deal with it. Sure... it would suck to lose some of the winnings, but come on. There would still be 18 years left and they didn't have to pay out of pocket (really). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lise Michaels" <arilysnc@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: alt.bankruptcy Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 3:52 PM Subject: Re: "windfall winnings" after 341 meeting SNIP Plus, read between the lines, genius....this was a "medically related" bankruptcy (remember the earlier post?) Since this is pretyt much the only westernized nation without national health care, why should someone have to suffer because of the insufficiencies of that system? SNIP

mitchsm1@hotmail.com (Mitch) wrote in message news:<9569b011.0402230507.1b1c439f@posting.google.com>... klm_kim@yahoo.com (K Kim) wrote in message I agree that that person does not deserve sympathy from anyone. A debt is a debt. It does not matter how that debt is occurred, medical or not. That person is trying to blame the government for the debts. If that person does not like the US system, he/she is welcome to move out or vote to change to a new government. Let me point out that very few countries have liberal BK laws as the US does. If the bankruptcy was medically related, because of a failing of the government in providing coverage, that seems to go to the heart of her point. It is worth noting that most of those "terrible socialist" countries like Sweden, Norway, Denmark that have awesome govennment health care,

Awesome government health care? Where?

education benefits and the like are VERY difficult to immigrate to....

That must be the explanation to why Sweden has more immigrants per
capita than probably any other European country. And more than for
instance the US.
and have relatively low rates of people moving HERE from THERE, nowadays. Wasn't it PJ O'Rourke who wrote a few years back, that even on a TOURIST visit to Sweden, you could have a ton of super low cost health care/dental care? Pretty sweet!

As long as you are from the EU or Australia or Canada or some other
country with which the Swedish government has reciprocal health care
agreements. No such agreement between Sweden and the US, so Mr
O'Rourke's insurance company would have to pay up for him. And btw,
not even Swedes have low cost dental care. Not what I'd call low cost
anyway. Had my annual check-up a few weeks ago. No new cavities thank
goodness, but just the check-up in itself costs US$ 65.

Following up a point you made:

"Thoth" <thoth@notlisted.net> wrote in message news:<w6r_b.1472$qL1.850@fed1read02>...
The Bankruptcy Code expressly defines what the property of the estate includes. If the Code doesn't define the property as property of the estate, there's nothing anyone can do (unless you happen to be a congressperson). That said, if the trustee finds out that debtor won the lottery before the case closed, I'd hope s/he would make a 707(b) motion to dismiss the case. It's a substantial abuse of chapter 7 if debtor can afford to repay.

So, could you elaborate on the mechanics of that? For instance:

1) I assume such a 707(b) motion has to be made before the expiration
of the 60 day period AFTER the 341 meeting, correct?

2) If (1) is correct, then if someone filed Chapter 7 in Nove 2003,
had the 341 meeting in early January 2004, BUT (say) won a large prize
prior to the sixtieth day after the 341 hearing....it might be
appropriate to file that 707(b) motion?

3) On the other hand, if the person won such a windfall NINETY days
or so after the 341 meeting (but STILL before the "six months since
the actual filing"), even if it was a Mega-prize of a hundred million
or so, it would NOT be part of the bankruptcy estate, and thus free
and clear??

Interesting point below...but assuming that O'Rourke didn't have
coverage in the US....then who would foot the bill THEN? In effect,
would the "tourist" get free care??

marc_and_98@hotmail.com (Marcus Andersson) wrote in message:

Wasn't it PJ O'Rourke who wrote a few years back, that even on a TOURIST visit to Sweden, you could have a ton of super low cost health care/dental care? Pretty sweet! As long as you are from the EU or Australia or Canada or some other country with which the Swedish government has reciprocal health care agreements. No such agreement between Sweden and the US, so Mr O'Rourke's insurance company would have to pay up for him. And btw, not even Swedes have low cost dental care. Not what I'd call low cost anyway. Had my annual check-up a few weeks ago. No new cavities thank goodness, but just the check-up in itself costs US$ 65.

Well I dunno.... There was this case in the media a while ago... an
illegal immigrant who had some illness. The local hospital in Sweden
wouldn't give her any treatment that'd cost anything. They did let her
live in a room in the hospital and she'd get food but nothing more. No
treatment whatsoever even though they had the resources. So I guess
tourists without coverage would be treated the same?

If you follow the law to the letter, it'd actually be illegal for
hospitals owned by the local council to pay for treatment for others
since the law says local councils are only allowed to spend the local
taxpayers money on the local citizens themselves.
If they get a patient from another part of Sweden they'll send the
bill to the local government where he/she resides.
And if, say, a German gets treatment at a Swedish hospital the
hospital will send the bill to the German government.




mitchsm1@hotmail.com (Mitch) wrote in message news:<9569b011.0403020606.5dce9073@posting.google.com>... Interesting point below...but assuming that O'Rourke didn't have coverage in the US....then who would foot the bill THEN? In effect, would the "tourist" get free care?? marc_and_98@hotmail.com (Marcus Andersson) wrote in message: Wasn't it PJ O'Rourke who wrote a few years back, that even on TOURIST visit to Sweden, you could have a ton of super low cost health care/dental care? Pretty sweet! As long as you are from the EU or Australia or Canada or some other country with which the Swedish government has reciprocal health care agreements. No such agreement between Sweden and the US, so Mr O'Rourke's insurance company would have to pay up for him. And btw, not even Swedes have low cost dental care. Not what I'd call low cost anyway. Had my annual check-up a few weeks ago. No new cavities thank goodness, but just the check-up in itself costs US$ 65.