U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan operates as a unit of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Congress vested original jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases in the district courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1334, and the district court refers that work to its bankruptcy judges under 28 U.S.C. § 157(a). In this district, as in most, the referral is standing and automatic. Every petition filed under title 11 lands in front of a bankruptcy judge without any separate motion. The design lets the district court keep ultimate authority while daily administration sits with judges who handle bankruptcy and little else.

Bankruptcy judges are appointed by the court of appeals for the circuit, here the Sixth Circuit, under 28 U.S.C. § 152. They serve fourteen year terms and may be reappointed. They are Article I judges, a status that shapes the limits described below. A judge in this bankruptcy court presides over the full arc of a case: the meeting of creditors schedule, plan confirmation, fee applications, the discharge, and the disputes that break out along the way. When you retain counsel to appear here, you are hiring someone who will stand before that judge repeatedly, often on short notice and often on matters where the record was built weeks earlier.

The referral statute splits the work into core and non-core matters. Core proceedings, listed in 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2), are those integral to the case itself: allowance of claims, confirmation of plans, objections to discharge, preference actions, and orders on the automatic stay. In a core matter the bankruptcy court may enter a final judgment, subject to appeal. Non-core matters merely relate to the case, such as a state law contract claim the estate holds against an outsider. There the bankruptcy court ordinarily submits proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the district court, which reviews them de novo under 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1), unless the parties consent to a final ruling below.

That division is more than bookkeeping. In Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011), the Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy court could not enter final judgment on a state law counterclaim that would not necessarily be resolved in ruling on a proof of claim, even though the statute labeled the claim core. The decision created a category some practitioners call Stern claims, where the label reads core but the Constitution withholds final power. The Court eased the practical bite in Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, 575 U.S. 665 (2015), holding that litigants may consent to final adjudication, and that consent can be knowing and voluntary without being express. Counsel must therefore think early about whether a given claim can be decided finally in this bankruptcy court or whether it travels up to the district judge.

Appeals follow two possible paths. A party may appeal a final order to the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), or, in circuits that maintain one, to the bankruptcy appellate panel. The Sixth Circuit is one of five circuits that operate a BAP; the others are the First, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth. So a litigant leaving this bankruptcy court may take the appeal to the district court or elect the Sixth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. From either forum, the road runs on to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The choice between district court and panel carries strategic weight, because a party can pull the appeal into the district court by declining the panel within the time the rules allow.

Interlocutory orders behave differently. Many orders in a case are not final in the ordinary sense, and review of them requires leave under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(3). Certain orders, such as confirmation of a plan or an order lifting the automatic stay, are treated as final and appealable as of right. Lawyers who work regularly in this bankruptcy court learn which rulings can be challenged at once and which must wait, because a missed deadline can end the fight before it starts. The appeal window is short. A notice of appeal is generally due within fourteen days under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002, and that clock does not forgive good intentions.

National scale gives the setting context. For the twelve month period ending March 31, 2025, bankruptcy petitions filed across the country reached 529,080, up 13 percent, and 86 of the 90 bankruptcy courts reported higher filings. Bankruptcy appellate panel filings totaled 329 for the same period. Those numbers describe pressure. A busy bankruptcy court moves its docket briskly, sets tight response times, and expects counsel to arrive ready. The Eastern District of Michigan sits inside that flow, drawing consumer filings from wage earners and homeowners alongside business cases that can consume a courtroom for days.

One more structural point deserves attention before the chapters. The bankruptcy court does not act alone in administering estates. A United States Trustee, part of the Department of Justice, oversees case administration, appoints and supervises panel trustees, and can object to plans, fees, and discharges. Standing trustees run the chapter 13 and chapter 12 machinery. Chapter 7 trustees liquidate assets and pursue recoveries for creditors. Counsel who understand how these offices interact with the bankruptcy court can predict where objections will come from and shape filings to meet them. Knowing which official holds which lever often matters as much as knowing the statute.

How a case behaves inside all of this depends heavily on the chapter under which it was filed, and the differences among the chapters set the terms for everything that follows.

Most cases in this bankruptcy court begin under one of four chapters of title 11, and the chapter chosen at the outset controls the pace, the players, and the outcome. Chapter 7 liquidates. Chapter 13 repays over time. Chapter 11 reorganizes a going concern. Chapter 12 handles family farmers and fishermen. A debtor's income, assets, debt structure, and goals determine which door fits, and choosing wrong can force a costly conversion later. Counsel who file often in this bankruptcy court weigh eligibility and strategy together, because the chapter shapes which creditors can be paid, which liens survive, and which disputes will reach the judge.

Chapter 7 is the most common consumer filing. A trustee takes control of the debtor's non-exempt property, sells it, and distributes the proceeds under the priority scheme of 11 U.S.C. § 726. Many individual chapter 7 cases are no-asset cases, where exemptions cover everything and creditors receive nothing. Businesses also use chapter 7 to wind down when reorganization makes no sense; the entity does not receive a discharge, but its assets are marshaled and sold. In this bankruptcy court a chapter 7 debtor who is an individual attends the meeting of creditors under 11 U.S.C. § 341, answers the trustee's questions under oath, and, absent objection, receives a discharge within a few months.

Eligibility for chapter 7 runs through the means test of 11 U.S.C. § 707(b). A debtor whose current monthly income exceeds the state median faces a calculation of disposable income; too much surplus, and the case may be presumed abusive and dismissed or converted. The discharge itself is broad but not total. Debts described in 11 U.S.C. § 523, including many taxes, most student loans, and obligations for fraud, survive. A creditor who believes a debt fits one of those categories must act inside the deadline, or the bankruptcy court will discharge the debt with the rest.

Chapter 13 is the wage earner's repayment path. An individual with regular income and debts below the caps in 11 U.S.C. § 109(e) proposes a plan to pay creditors from future earnings over three to five years. The plan can cure a mortgage default, keep a car, and strip wholly unsecured junior liens in some circumstances. A standing chapter 13 trustee collects the payments and distributes them. The bankruptcy court confirms the plan only if it meets the standards of 11 U.S.C. § 1325, including good faith and the best interest of creditors test, which guarantees unsecured creditors at least what they would receive in a chapter 7 liquidation. Confirmation contests in this bankruptcy court often turn on plan feasibility and the treatment of secured claims.

Chapter 11 reorganizes businesses, and sometimes individuals with debts too large for chapter 13. The debtor usually stays in possession as a debtor in possession, exercising many of the powers of a trustee under 11 U.S.C. § 1107. The case runs on disclosure and negotiation: a disclosure statement, a plan, classes of creditors who vote, and a confirmation hearing where the bankruptcy court applies 11 U.S.C. § 1129. If a class rejects, the plan may still be confirmed through cramdown, provided it does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable. Subchapter V, added by the Small Business Reorganization Act, gives smaller business debtors a faster, cheaper track with a trustee who facilitates rather than displaces management. Large chapter 11 cases can occupy the bankruptcy court for months and draw committees, financing motions, and asset sales under 11 U.S.C. § 363.

Chapter 12 serves family farmers and family fishermen who meet the definitions and debt limits of 11 U.S.C. § 109(f). It borrows the repayment structure of chapter 13 but bends the rules to the rhythms of agriculture, allowing seasonal payments and generous treatment of secured farm debt. Cases are relatively few, yet they matter in a state with substantial agriculture. When one arrives, this bankruptcy court applies confirmation standards under 11 U.S.C. § 1225 that echo chapter 13 while accounting for the volatility of farm income.

The verified national figures put these chapters in perspective. For the twelve month period ending March 31, 2025, bankruptcy petitions filed nationwide reached 529,080, up 13 percent, and 86 of the 90 bankruptcy courts reported higher filings. Chapter 7 and chapter 13 make up the great bulk of consumer petitions, while chapter 11 and chapter 12 filings are far fewer but far heavier per case. A single reorganization can generate more contested hearings than hundreds of no-asset chapter 7 cases combined. Rising filings mean a busier bankruptcy court, tighter hearing calendars, and less patience for filings that are incomplete or late.

Choosing a chapter is only the opening move. Once a case is pending, either debtor or creditor can convert or dismiss under the standards of 11 U.S.C. § 1112 and its companions, and the bankruptcy court weighs cause, good faith, and the interests of creditors before it acts. A chapter 13 that fails to fund can drop into chapter 7. A chapter 11 that cannot confirm may be dismissed or converted. Counsel who anticipate these pivots build records early, because the same facts that support confirmation also defend against a motion to convert.

Whatever chapter frames the case, the sharp disputes rarely resolve themselves through routine administration. They surface as litigation, and the bankruptcy court has its own procedural machinery for resolving them.

Litigation inside a bankruptcy case runs on two procedural tracks, and knowing which one applies is the first thing competent counsel settles. Some disputes are adversary proceedings, full lawsuits filed within the case. Others are contested matters, resolved by motion. The distinction controls the pleadings, the discovery, and the timeline. A lawyer who files a motion where the rules demand a complaint invites dismissal, and a bankruptcy court will not overlook the error simply because the dispute is small. Both tracks end in orders the same judge enters, but they get there by different routes.

Adversary proceedings are governed by Part VII of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, which imports much of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 7001 lists what must proceed this way: recovering money or property, determining the validity or priority of a lien, objecting to or revoking a discharge, determining the dischargeability of a debt, and obtaining an injunction, among others. These cases carry their own docket number, require a summons and complaint, and permit discovery under rules that track civil practice. When a creditor sues to declare a debt nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523, or a trustee sues to avoid a transfer, the bankruptcy court hears it as an adversary proceeding, with the fuller process that label brings.

Contested matters are the workhorses. Rule 9014 covers any dispute raised by motion that is not an adversary proceeding: objections to claims, motions for relief from the automatic stay, objections to plan confirmation, and requests to assume or reject leases. The bankruptcy court can order that discovery apply, but the default is faster and leaner than an adversary proceeding. Most fights a debtor or creditor will have live here. A well drafted motion, supported by declarations and documents, often decides the question before any hearing, because the bankruptcy court reads the papers closely and expects the movant to carry the burden the statute assigns.

The automatic stay is the feature every party feels first. Under 11 U.S.C. § 362, the filing of a petition halts collection, foreclosure, repossession, and most litigation against the debtor. The stay is broad and immediate, and it binds creditors whether or not they have notice. In Citizens Bank of Maryland v. Strumpf, 516 U.S. 16 (1995), the Supreme Court examined how far a bank could go in administratively holding funds without violating the stay, and the case remains a reference point when a creditor tests the line. Violating the stay exposes a creditor to damages under 11 U.S.C. § 362(k), so counsel advise clients to stop and seek relief rather than press ahead.

Relief from the stay is itself a contested matter. A secured creditor moves under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), arguing cause, including lack of adequate protection, or that the debtor has no equity in property that is not necessary to reorganization. The bankruptcy court holds a preliminary hearing quickly, and the statute imposes a thirty day pressure valve that keeps these motions moving. A mortgagee seeking to resume a foreclosure, or a lender wanting its collateral back, lives or dies on the equity cushion and the debtor's ability to make adequate protection payments. Debtors respond with plan treatment, valuation evidence, and a record showing the collateral is protected.

The estate's recovery powers generate some of the hardest litigation. Preferences, governed by 11 U.S.C. § 547, let a trustee claw back certain payments a debtor made to creditors in the ninety days before filing, or one year for insiders, when the payment let that creditor receive more than it would in a chapter 7 liquidation. Creditors defend with the statutory exceptions in 11 U.S.C. § 547(c), chiefly the contemporaneous exchange, the ordinary course of business, and the subsequent new value defenses. The Supreme Court read the ordinary course defense in Union Bank v. Wolas, 502 U.S. 151 (1991), holding it can reach payments on long term debt. A supplier hit with a preference demand in this bankruptcy court will usually reconstruct its payment history to show the transfers fit an established pattern.

Fraudulent transfers reach further back. Under 11 U.S.C. § 548, a trustee may avoid transfers made within two years of filing that were either actually intended to hinder creditors or made for less than reasonably equivalent value while the debtor was insolvent. Through 11 U.S.C. § 544, the trustee also borrows state law, including Michigan's version of the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, which extends the reach period further. In BFP v. Resolution Trust Corp., 511 U.S. 531 (1994), the Court held that a price obtained at a regularly conducted, noncollusive foreclosure sale is reasonably equivalent value, closing one avenue trustees had tried. These actions come as adversary proceedings, and the bankruptcy court applies both the badges of fraud and the solvency analysis to sort winners from losers.

How the parties move differs by role. A trustee or debtor in possession is the estate's champion, wielding avoidance powers, objecting to claims, and prosecuting recoveries that fund distributions. A creditor plays defense on those actions and offense on its own: filing a proof of claim, moving for stay relief, objecting to confirmation, and, where the facts support it, filing an adversary proceeding to bar discharge of its debt. Discharge itself has teeth. In Taggart v. Lorenzen, 587 U.S. 554 (2019), the Court set the standard for holding a creditor in civil contempt for violating a discharge injunction, requiring no fair ground of doubt that the conduct was barred. Counsel who practice steadily in this bankruptcy court read these motions and complaints against the clock, because bar dates for claims, dischargeability complaints, and objections to discharge are strict, and the bankruptcy court enforces them without much sympathy for the tardy.

An order from this bankruptcy court is rarely the last word on a dispute. A party who loses can appeal, and the route splits at the first step. Under 28 U.S.C. § 158, an appeal from a final judgment, order, or decree of the bankruptcy court runs to the district court, or, in circuits that operate one, to a bankruptcy appellate panel. The Sixth Circuit runs a BAP. A litigant here chooses between two forums for the first level of review, and the choice carries real consequences for speed and precedent.

The district court is the default path. Either side can force the appeal there by filing a timely election under the statute, which pulls the matter away from the panel and onto the docket of an Article III district judge. Without that election, an appeal from this bankruptcy court can land at the Sixth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, a group of sitting bankruptcy judges drawn from across the circuit who hear appeals from districts other than their own. Nationally the panels handle a thin slice of the work. In the twelve months ending March 31, 2025, bankruptcy appellate panel filings totaled 329 across the five circuits that operate them, the First, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth. District courts and the parties resolve most of the rest.

Deadlines here are short and jurisdictional in effect. A notice of appeal generally must be filed within fourteen days of entry of the order under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002, a window far tighter than the thirty days that governs most civil appeals. Miss it, and the right to review from the bankruptcy court usually evaporates. The rule allows a short extension for excusable neglect if the request comes in time, but the court applies it narrowly. Counsel who practice here calendar the date the moment an adverse order posts, because a motion for stay pending appeal, a designation of the record, and a statement of issues all follow on their own clocks.

Not every order can be appealed at once. Finality in bankruptcy is measured differently than in ordinary civil litigation, because a single case spawns many discrete disputes. The Supreme Court has mapped some of the edges. In Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 575 U.S. 496 (2015), the Court held that an order denying confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan is not final and immediately appealable, since the debtor can propose another plan. In Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, 589 U.S. 35 (2020), by contrast, the Court held that an order conclusively denying stay relief is final and must be appealed then. Reading those lines correctly keeps a party from forfeiting review in the bankruptcy bench or spending it too early.

On the merits, the reviewing court divides its lens. It reviews this court's legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for clear error, with discretionary calls, like many scheduling and sanction rulings, reviewed for abuse of discretion. That framework rewards a clean trial record. A creditor or debtor who wants room to appeal builds the evidentiary foundation in the court first, because the panel or district judge will not take new proof. Arguments never raised below are generally waived, so the record made in the bankruptcy bench defines the appeal.

Bankruptcy does not sit apart from other litigation. The moment a petition is filed, 11 U.S.C. § 362 imposes an automatic stay that halts most lawsuits, collection efforts, and enforcement against the debtor and the estate. A creditor with a pending state matter, a foreclosure or a wage garnishment, must stop and decide whether to seek relief from the stay in this court or wait. Acting in violation of the stay can draw sanctions. The stay is one of the strongest tools the bankruptcy court wields, and it reorders every dispute the debtor was already fighting.

Some of those fights move into federal court entirely. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1452, a party can remove a related civil claim from state court to the district court, from which it is referred to the bankruptcy bench. The mirror doctrine is abstention. 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c) lets the court abstain, and in some situations requires it, when a state-law claim belongs in the state forum and can be timely adjudicated there. Counsel weigh whether a construction dispute or a shareholder claim is better tried before this court, which already knows the estate, or sent back to a judge who has lived with the state-law issues.

Two more limits shape the interaction. Constitutional authority is not unlimited. In Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011), the Court held that the court, as a non-Article III body, cannot enter final judgment on certain state-law counterclaims even when the statute labels them core, so those matters may require proposed findings sent to the district court. Separately, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars a losing state-court party from using the bankruptcy bench as an appellate substitute to undo a state judgment. A skilled advocate spots these fault lines before filing anything.

From the panel or the district court, the next stop is the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and after that, in rare cases, the Supreme Court. The odds of reaching that far are slim, and most disputes end well before it. This directory lets a client filter for counsel who has actually briefed appeals out of this this court, a skill distinct from arguing motions in it, because appellate work runs on its own deadlines and record rules. The listings note where a firm sits in this directory's plan tiers, so ordering reflects that tier and verification status rather than any judgment about outcome. Read the profile, then read the docket behind it.

Section one described this bankruptcy court as a unit of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, hearing cases referred under 28 U.S.C. § 157. That structure shapes how you pick a lawyer. The bankruptcy court runs on its own rhythms, its own local practices, and relationships that outsiders do not see. Choosing counsel starts with a plain question: are you the debtor, or a creditor, and how contested is the matter likely to get?

Debtor practice and creditor practice pull in different directions. A debtor's lawyer builds the petition, the schedules, the statement of financial affairs, and the list of creditors, shepherds the case through the meeting of creditors, and, in a reorganization, drives a plan toward confirmation before the bankruptcy court. A creditor's lawyer files proofs of claim, polices the automatic stay, objects to plans that shortchange the client, and, where the facts warrant, sues to except a debt from discharge. Some firms do both, on different cases. Others commit to one side, and that focus shows in how quickly they read a docket in this bankruptcy court.

Trustees sit at the center of most cases, and knowing them matters. In a Chapter 7, a panel trustee gathers and liquidates non-exempt assets for creditors. In a Chapter 13, a standing trustee administers the debtor's plan payments. Over both stands the United States Trustee, a Department of Justice component that polices the system, reviews fee applications, and can move to dismiss or convert. Counsel who appears often before this bankruptcy court knows how each trustee handles document demands, valuation fights, and settlement. Relationships are professional, never improper, but familiarity with a trustee's methods lets counsel anticipate objections and stage the evidence a valuation fight will need.

The Code regulates what lawyers earn, which is unusual and worth understanding. Any professional the estate employs, including debtor's counsel in a Chapter 11, must be approved under 11 U.S.C. § 327 and be disinterested. Compensation runs through 11 U.S.C. § 330, which lets the bankruptcy bench award reasonable fees and expenses and cut them if the work was duplicative or produced no benefit. 11 U.S.C. § 328 allows pre-approved terms, and 11 U.S.C. § 329 forces every debtor's attorney to disclose compensation, giving this court power to claw back anything excessive. Fee applications are public and litigated. The court reviews them on notice, and a creditor or the United States Trustee can object, which turns a routine bill into a contested hearing.

Consumer debtors get extra protection. The debt relief agency rules in 11 U.S.C. §§ 526 through 528 impose disclosure and conduct duties on those who help consumers file, and the Supreme Court upheld the core of them in Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States, 559 U.S. 229 (2010). Ask a prospective lawyer how fees are structured, what the flat fee covers, and what triggers extra charges. In a Chapter 13, part of the attorney fee is often paid through the plan, which means the bankruptcy bench and the trustee both see and approve it.

Experience in front of this particular court is not interchangeable with general litigation skill. Local expectations govern how motions get noticed and how fast a stay-relief matter reaches hearing. Judges also differ on how they handle contested valuations and cramdown, so practice varies from courtroom to courtroom, and a lawyer's habit of appearing here is worth more than a national reputation earned elsewhere. When you interview counsel, ask how many cases they have carried through confirmation or trial in this court. Ask for specifics, the chapter, the outcome, and whether the matter went to a contested hearing.

Where a firm has earned verification, this directory has checked the basics and dates each check it runs. An editor confirms that the lawyer is licensed and in good standing, that the practice areas match the actual work, and that the firm handles matters in this the bankruptcy bench rather than merely claiming the category. Listings carry the date of their last editor review, so you can see whether the information is current or stale. Verification is not an endorsement, and it promises no particular result before this court.

Ordering inside this directory reflects a firm's plan tier and its verification status, and the listings say so plainly. A higher tier buys placement rather than skill, and the directory does not rank lawyers by outcome. Use the tier as a starting filter, then do the work: read the dated verification, check whether the firm's appellate and trial experience matches your dispute, and confirm the fee arrangement in writing before you retain anyone to stand up for you in this court.

Return to where this started. The bankruptcy bench is a wing of the district court, bound to it by the referral and by the appeal routes laid out above. A lawyer who understands that architecture, who reads the trustee's incentives, who prices the work in a way the Code will bless, and who has stood before these judges, gives a client steadier footing. The petition is only the opening. What follows is months of contested practice in this court that expects preparation, and the docket rewards preparation over volume. Ask about it, and confirm it in the fee letter before you sign.