Hedquist v. Fokkena (In Re Hedquist)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming 16 dismissal of a bankruptcy case in which the debtors did not obtain pre-petition counseling and 17 stating that “the new requirements in section 109(h
• bankruptcy courts have no discretion but to dismiss a case when the debtor does not comply with Section 109(h)
• bankruptcy courts have no discretion but to dismiss a case when the debtor fails to file a certification in compliance with the credit counseling provisions of § 109
• bankruptcy courts have no discretion but to dismiss a case when the debtor fails to file a certification in compliance with the credit counseling provisions of Section 109
• “But because those requirements are mandatory, bankruptcy courts have no discretion but to dismiss the case when the debtor failed to file a certification in compliance with its provisions.”
• “the new requirements in [Sjection 109(h) can, in some circumstances, create harsh results.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).