Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts

549 U.S. 365 (2007)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts

United States Supreme Court
549 U.S. 365 (2007)

Facts

Robert Marrama (debtor) filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in March 2003. Marrama’s bankruptcy schedules contained misleading or inaccurate disclosures about Marrama’s assets, including the untrue statements that Marrama’s house in Maine had no value and that Marrama had never transferred any property other than in the ordinary course of business within the year preceding his bankruptcy filing. In actuality, the house had value, and Marrama had transferred the house into a trust for no consideration seven months before filing for bankruptcy. Marrama subsequently revealed that his purpose in transferring the house into the trust was to protect the house from his creditors. The bankruptcy trustee advised Marrama that the trustee intended to recover the house for Marrama’s bankruptcy estate. Marrama then sought to convert his Chapter 7 case to a Chapter 13 case. The trustee and Citizens Bank of Massachusetts (the bank) (creditor) objected to conversion, asserting that the request to convert was made in bad faith and would constitute an abuse of the bankruptcy process, as evidenced by Marrama’s previous attempt to conceal the house from his creditors. Marrama argued that his original misstatements about the Maine house were unintentional mistakes and that he had originally filed under Chapter 7 because he was unemployed when he filed for bankruptcy and thus had been ineligible to proceed under Chapter 13 at the time. Marrama contended that because he had recently become employed, he could convert his case to Chapter 13. The bankruptcy court rejected Marrama’s arguments and denied the request for conversion. On appeal, Marrama argued that he had an absolute right to convert his case from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13 under 11 U.S.C. § 706(a). Both the bankruptcy appellate panel and the First Circuit rejected Marrama’s argument, concluding that a bad-faith debtor does not have an absolute right to convert a Chapter 7 proceeding to a Chapter 13 proceeding. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)

Dissent (Alito, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership