David Devonte Fairchild

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
IN THE MATTER OF: 	: 	CASE NUMBER
:
DAVID DEVONTE FAIRCHILD, 	: 	25-59296-LRC
:
:
: 	IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER
: 	CHAPTER 7 OF THE
DEBTOR. 	: 	BANKRUPTCY CODE
ORDER
Before the Court is Debtor’s Amended Motion to Reopen Case for the purpose of
filing a reaffirmation agreement (Doc. 41, the “Amended Motion”). 	On August 15, 2025,
Debtor filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. 	Debtor
received a discharge, and the case was closed on January 15, 2026. 	On January 30, 2026,
Debtor filed a motion, seeking to reopen the case for the purpose of filing a reaffirmation
agreement between Debtor and Publix Employee Credit Union (“PEFCU”) (Doc. 35, the
_______________________________________________________________
IT IS ORDERED as set forth below:
_____________________________________
Lisa Ritchey Craig
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge
Date: March 5, 2026
Case 25-59296-lrc Doc 44 Filed 03/05/26 Entered 03/05/26 11:42:38 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 4

2
“Motion”). 	The Motion stated that “a lack of experience caused the reaffirmation
agreement to not be filed in a timely manner.”
The Court entered an order on February 9, 2026, (Doc. 38, the “Order”) noting that a
copy of an executed reaffirmation agreement was not attached to the Motion, and the
Motion did not state when Debtor made a reaffirmation agreement with PEFCU. 	The
Court gave Debtor an opportunity to amend the Motion to clarify when the reaffirmation
agreement was made. 	Debtor filed the Amended Motion on March 3, 2026, which
clarifies that Debtor did not understand the necessity of entering a reaffirmation agreement
with PEFCU until he was informed by the Chapter 7 trustee. 	Debtor also filed a
reaffirmation agreement (Doc. 42, the “Reaffirmation Agreement”) and a letter from
PEFCU. 	It appears from the Amended Motion and the Reaffirmation Agreement that
Debtor and PEFCU had not “made” a reaffirmation agreement until after the discharge was
entered in this case.
As the Court noted in the Order, pursuant to § 350(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, the
Court may reopen a closed case “to administer assets, to accord relief to the debtor, or for
other cause.” 	See 11 U.S.C. § 350(b); see also FED. R. B ANKR . P. 5010. 	“Cause” to
reopen a case does not exist if “‘reopening a bankruptcy case would serve no purpose.’”
In re Wang, 2007 WL 7140214, *1 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Jan. 26, 2007) (Massey, J.) (quoting
In re James, 2005 Bankr. LEXIS 288 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2005)). Here, Debtor seeks to
Case 25-59296-lrc Doc 44 Filed 03/05/26 Entered 03/05/26 11:42:38 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 4

3
reopen the case to file a reaffirmation agreement with PEFCU. 	Under § 524(c), a
reaffirmation agreement is enforceable only if it is “made” prior to the entry of the
discharge. 	See 11 U.S.C. § 524(c); see also Wang, 2007 WL 7140214, *1 (citing In re
Kinion, 207 F.3d 751, 756 (5 th Cir. 2000)). 	The date of execution of a reaffirmation
agreement is not necessarily dispositive of the date upon which the agreement is “made” for
purposes of § 524(c). 	See In re Lebeau, 247 B.R. 53, 539 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2000); In re
Picciano, 2008 WL 1984255 (Bankr. E.D. Va. May 5, 2008). 	For example, in In re
Lebeau, the court concluded that a reaffirmation agreement is “made” within the meaning
of § 524(c) at the time a “meeting of the minds” exists between the parties. 	In re Lebeau,
247 B.R. at 539. 	To determine whether a meeting of the minds existed prior to the entry of
the discharge, the court considered evidence regarding the parties’ intent to enter a
reaffirmation agreement. 	Id.
The Reaffirmation Agreement that appears to have been prepared by PEFCU and
sent to Debtor on March 2, 2026. 	It was signed by Debtor on March 3, 2026, but has not
yet been executed by PEFCU. Based on these facts, the Court cannot conclude that the
agreement was “made” prior to the entry of the discharge. 	Accordingly, reopening the
case to permit the filing of the Reaffirmation Agreement would be futile. 	For this reason,
IT IS ORDERED that the Amended Motion is DENIED, and to the extent the
Reaffirmation Agreement contains a motion for approval of the Reaffirmation Agreement,
Case 25-59296-lrc Doc 44 Filed 03/05/26 Entered 03/05/26 11:42:38 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 4

4
it is DENIED.
END OF DOCUMENT
Distribution List
David Devonte Fairchild
Apt 414
2100 Arbor Drive
Duluth, GA 30096
Yomairo Santiago
Member Resolution Specialist
Publix Employees Federal Credit Union
3005 New Tampa Highway
P.O. Box 1000
Lakeland, FL 33802
Neil C. Gordon
Taylor Duma LLP
Suite 200
1600 Parkwood Circle SE
Atlanta, GA 30339
Case 25-59296-lrc Doc 44 Filed 03/05/26 Entered 03/05/26 11:42:38 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 4