§ 1325(b)

In re Krapf

A chapter 13 trustee filed an amended motion seeking modification of two joint debtors'confirmed chapter 13 plan. The trustee contended that a workers'compensation settlement that one of the debtors received, which was exempt under S.C. Code Ann. § 42-9-360(A), should nevertheless be included in the debtors'disposable income calculation, as set out in 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b).
Ruling: 
Trustee's motion to modify plan to include exempt workers' compensation settlement in disposable income denied.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Krapf. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Tranmer

Pending in the chapter 13 bankruptcy was confirmation of debtors'chapter 13 plan and the trustee's objections thereto based upon the "disposable income" test of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B) and , by reference, 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2)(A)(ii).
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied due to monthly charitable contribution not necessary for debtor's employment.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Tranmer. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Cleary

The matter was before the court for hearing on confirmation of the debtor's plan dated July 31, 2006. The chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation.
Ruling: 
Private school tuition was reasonable and necessary expense.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Cleary. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Zirtzman

The debtors moved for confirmation of their chapter 13 plan. The unresolved issue for confirmation was whether the plan length was to be for three years, as proposed in the debtors'plan, or for five years, as indicated on Official Bankr. Form B22C and 11 U.S.C. §§ 1322 and 1325.
Ruling: 
Plan was not confirmable as debtor's income was above median income but proposed applicable commitment period was for three rather thanthe required five years.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Zirtzman. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Morgan v. Goldman (In re Morgan)

After a chapter 13 trustee disbursed $10,000 to debtors allegedly to fund a roof repair on their home, the court issued an order to both the trustee and debtors to show cause why they should not be required to reimburse the estate for the entire sum. Debtors were also ordered to file an accounting showing how the funds were actually used.
Ruling: 
Debtors and trustee ordered to repay sum improperly released by trustee for roof repairs and used by debtors'for gambling junkets.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Morgan v. Goldman (In re Morgan). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Love

A chapter 13 case came before the court for a hearing on confirmation of the debtors'plan. The chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation, contending that the plan failed to pay all of the debtors'projected disposable income.
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied where plan included deductions for payments on secured debt which would be avoided by surrender of collateral.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Love. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Davis

After the debtor filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy protection, she filed a chapter 13 plan proposing to make biweekly payments for 36 months. The trustee filed an objection to the plan. The bankruptcy court held a confirmation hearing.
Ruling: 
Plan confirmation denied due to failure to meet minimum "applicable commitment period."
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Davis. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Nevitt

In companion chapter 13 cases, the standing chapter 13 trustee filed motions to dismiss the plans of debtors. The issue was whether Schedule J or Form B22C should be used to calculate "projected disposable income" for the debtors, whose earnings fell below the median family income, to be determined in accordance with 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(2).
Ruling: 
Schedule J was to be used to calculate projected disposable income for debtors below median family income.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Nevitt. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Demonica

The chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b), arguing that the debtor was not using all of his disposable income to fund the chapter 13 plan. The instant matter involved the application of Form B22C (used to report and calculate current monthly income for chapter 13 debtors) in the context of confirmation of a chapter 13 plan proposed by a debtor who earned above the median family income.
Ruling: 
Confirmation objection was sustained because Schedule I had to be used to determine proper expenses to be deducted from projected disposable income.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Demonica. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Risher

The debtors in several chapter 13 cases filed motions in support of provisions in their chapter 13 that sought to exclude tax refunds as part of any distribution to unsecured creditors in their chapter 13 plans. The chapter 13 trustee objected to these provisions as contrary to Bankr. W.D. Ky. R. 13.5(b) and 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B).
Ruling: 
Debtor with plan distributing less than 100% to creditors was required to submit tax refunds to chapter 13 trustee.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Risher. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Pages

Subscribe to § 1325(b)