Skip to main content

§ 1322(a)(1)

Giesbrecht v. Fitzgerald (In re Giesbrecht)

Apr
28
2010
Ruling
Case remanded to allow confirmation of debtor's original plan proposing direct payments of car loan to creditor.
Procedural posture

Debtors sought review of orders from the bankruptcy court for the Western District of Washington, which entered judgment in favor of appellee trustee and denied confirmation of the debtors' plan because it proposed direct payments of a car loan to a creditor instead of through the plan and which confirmed the debtors' amended plan, which proposed to pay the car loan through the plan.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Giesbrecht v. Fitzgerald (In re Giesbrecht) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Consumer opinion summary, case decided on April 28, 2010 , LexisNexis #0710-095
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

In re Carey

Mar
09
2009
Ruling
Confirmation denied as plan was not feasible.
Procedural posture

Chapter 13 trustee moved to deny confirmation of each of the debtors' chapter 13 plans because such plans provided that the debtors would make postpetition mortgage payments directly to the respective mortgage holder, and not as part of their chapter 13 plan payments to the trustee. The court held a joint hearing.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Carey Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 09, 2009 , LexisNexis #0409-060
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

DeHart v. Baden (In re Baden)

Oct
30
2008
Ruling
Confirmation denied due to debtor's exclusion of unemployment compensation from current monthly income calculation.
Procedural posture

The chapter 13 trustee filed an objection to the confirmation of the debtors' chapter 13 plan. The trustee asserted that the debtors' improperly excluded unemployment compensation that the husband received under the Social Security Act in the calculation of current monthly income (CMI). The trustee contended that this treatment of unemployment compensation violated 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(a)(1).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of DeHart v. Baden (In re Baden) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on October 30, 2008 , LexisNexis #0109-023
LexisNexis Article
Learn More
Subscribe to %1