In re Rodger

The court had before it debtors' Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 Motion for Relief from Order or to Alter/Amend Order. The Motion alleged that section III.C of the court's February 5, 2010 memorandum opinion contained a manifest error of law when it explained that the below median debtors in this case had to pay their disposable income not only during the first three years of their chapter 13 plan but for the duration of the plan.