ILNews

Bankruptcy filings up in Indiana

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Bankruptcy cases in federal courts have increased more than 30 percent in the fiscal year ending in September as compared to the 2007 fiscal year. In Indiana, bankruptcy cases have increased more than 25 percent in the U.S. District Court's Northern and Southern districts.

For the federal judiciary's fiscal year ending Sept. 30, the Northern and Southern Districts had 37,538 bankruptcy filings, according to statistics from U.S. Courts. Filings increased 25 percent in the Northern District and 27.5 percent in the Southern District. In the 2007 fiscal year, bankruptcies filed in Indiana totaled 29,656.

Nationally, 1,042,993 bankruptcy cases were filed in federal courts this fiscal year, as compared to the 801,269 filed in 2007.

Matthew Schiller, partner of Schiller Law Offices in Indianapolis, isn't surprised by the increase in bankruptcies here. He's seen an increase as a result of foreclosures and credit card use.

Many adjustable rate mortgages entered into two or three years ago are resetting now and increasing to the point people can't make their payments, he said. And, because of the credit crisis, people can't refinance their mortgages, get credit, or transfer credit card balances.

"We started to see an increase six to eight months ago," he said. "A lot of it is tied to credit problems."

Besides housing and credit card issues, people have filed bankruptcy as a result of unemployment, Schiller said.

While Indiana's filings have increased, the state didn't experience the extreme uptick in filings states such as Arizona, California, Florida, and Nevada have seen. Bankruptcy filings in the Central District of California went up more than 96 percent over last year; Arizona's filings increased by 73.4 percent.

As for the states bordering Indiana, Illinois and Kentucky had comparable increases to Indiana at 25.1 percent in Illinois, and 26.6 percent in Kentucky. Ohio courts saw an average increase of around 13 percent and Michigan was near 22 percent.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT