§ 1325(b)

Yoon v. Krick (In re Krick)

In this adversary proceeding, plaintiff chapter 7 trustee sought a determination pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h) that she could sell defendant debtor's interest in real property in order to obtain proceeds of that sale for the benefit of the chapter 7 estate. Debtor and her defendant parents opposed the trustee's requested relief. The matter was pending judgment.
Ruling: 
Confirmation of chapter 13 plan revested debtor's interest in real estate with debtor so that postconversion chapter 7 estate had no salable interest in the property.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Yoon v. Krick (In re Krick). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on September 12,2007, LexisNexis #1007-104

In re Bardo

The debtors filed for relief under chapter 13, and submitted a proposed chapter 13 plan. The creditor filed an objection to the proposed plan, asserting that the debtors plan did not make a sufficient payment toward the unsecured creditors based on the amount of projected disposable income claimed by the debtors, subject to the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B).
Ruling: 
Plan payments to unsecured creditors were sufficient given debtors' proper reliance on projected income based on historic figures set forth in schedules I and J.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Bardo. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on September 07,2007, LexisNexis #0108-087

In re Jones

A chapter 13 trustee objected to the confirmation of an above median debtor's plan on that the grounds that 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(2) and (b)(3) precluded confirmation when the plan payments were less than the debtor's monthly disposable income.
Ruling: 
Plan payments less than monthly disposable income allowed where all unsecured claims would be paid in full.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Jones. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Warren

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 and submitted a proposed plan. A chapter 13 trustee objected, claiming that the proposed plan did not satisfy the "projected disposable income test" of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1).
Ruling: 
Debtor rebutted presumption of projected disposable income as calculated on Form 22C by demonstrating future reduction in income.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Warren. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on September 06,2007, LexisNexis #1007-130

In re Briscoe

A bankruptcy debtor proposed a chapter 13 plan which provided for payment of the debtor's projected disposable income to unsecured creditors, which was calculated under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(3) using a housing expense based on uniform IRS standards rather than the debtor's lower actual expense. The bankruptcy trustee objected to confirmation of the debtor's plan.
Ruling: 
Debtor was entitled to full housing expense based on IRS standards regardless of actual expense and IRS manual was not applicable.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Briscoe. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Sackett

Before the court in debtors'chapter 13 case was the chapter 13 trustee's objection to confirmation, which asserted that debtors' plan violated the 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B) disposable income test.
Ruling: 
Chapter 13 means test objections are to be determined as of effective date of plan.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Sackett. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on August 28,2007, LexisNexis #1007-056

In re Kidd

Multiple debtors filed individual petitions under chapter 13, and plans for repaying their creditors. A trustee who was appointed to manage each case filed objections to confirmation of the debtors'plans.
Ruling: 
Plans could not provide for early payment absent filing of motion for modification.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Kidd. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Kirsch

The trustee objected to the confirmation of the debtor's plan, arguing that, by failing to address the issue of the debtor's tax refunds, the plan violated the requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B) that the plan devote all of the debtor's projected disposable income to be received in the applicable commitment period to payment of unsecured creditors.
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied due to failure to address issue of tax redunds.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Kirsch. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on August 13,2007, LexisNexis #1207-091

In re Kemp

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13, and the debtor submitted a proposed amended chapter 13 plan. A chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the amended plan on the grounds that the amended plan did not commit all of the debtor's projected disposable income as required by 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B).
Ruling: 
Confirmation of amended plan denied due to above median debtors failure to commit all monthly disposable income.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Kemp. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on August 09,2007, LexisNexis #0108-018

In re Gehrke

Before the court for confirmation was debtors'Second Amended Plan, and the trustee's Objection thereto, challenging the deduction of ownership expense on Line 29 of Form B22C for a vehicle that was not secured by a lien, the expense deduction for taxes on Line 30 of Form B22C, and the deduction of secured debt on Line 47 of Form B22C for a motorcycle that was allegedly a luxury item.
Ruling: 
Deduction of ownership expense for payments on "luxury" motorcycle not indicative of bad faith.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Gehrke. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Pages

Subscribe to § 1325(b)