ILNews

Indiana bankruptcy filings decrease in 2011

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana saw fewer bankruptcies for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2011, than it did the year before, with the state improving its national ranking based on case filings.

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts released bankruptcy filing statistics Monday, showing an 8 percent decrease in the number of bankruptcy filings throughout the country between Oct. 1, 2010, and Sept. 30, 2011.

Nationally, courts saw 1,467,221 cases this year compared to the 1,596,355 million filed the year before. Filings dropped during the judiciary’s fourth quarter with 15 percent fewer than in the same three-month period in 2010. Overall, Chapter 7 filings were down 10 percent, Chapter 13 filings dropped 4 percent, and Chapter 11 filings decreased by 16 percent nationwide.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that includes Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin saw a 10 percent drop in bankruptcy filings overall, the figures show. A total 161,182 were filed last year and 145,018 by the end of this year’s fiscal year.

In the Northern District of Indiana, figures show filings decreased 15.7 percent – 16,477 by Sept. 30, 2011, compared to 19,538 by that time in 2010. The Chapter 7 filings dropped by 16 percent while the Chapter 13 filings decreased by 13.4 percent.

In the Southern District of Indiana, overall filings decreased by 14.5 percent – 24,727 this year compared to 28,905 last year. The Chapter 7 filings decreased by 13.8 percent and the Chapter 13 filings dropped by 15.5 percent, statistics show.

Fewer filings improved Indiana’s national bankruptcy ranking. The state is ranked seventh this year in overall filings, compared to fourth last year. Indiana was third last year in Chapter 7 filings, and this year the state ranked sixth. Indiana dropped from 10th to 11th place in Chapter 13 filings.
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT