§ 1325(b)

In re Carlyle

The chapter 13 trustee objected to the debtor's plan on the ground that the marital adjustments the debtor took on Lines 13 and 19 of her "Chapter 13 Statement of Current Monthly Income and Calculation of Commitment Period and Disposable Income" means-test form were inappropriate.
Ruling: 
Payments on non-debtor husband's truck were not made for household expenses and could be deducted from income calculations.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Carlyle. 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 July 17,2013, LexisNexis #0813-030

In re Kramer

A chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the debtors' plan on the grounds that the plan failed to direct all available projected disposable income to payment of creditors and on the grounds that they understated their projected disposable income and consequently, the plan did not satisfy the best efforts test of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b)(1)(B).
Ruling: 
Chapter 13 debtor's deduction for payments on second mortgage to be treated as unsecured had to be excluded from projected disposable income calculation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Kramer. 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 July 12,2013, LexisNexis #0813-068

Ranta v. Gorman

Chapter 13 debtor challenged a decision of the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, which affirmed a bankruptcy court decision denying confirmation of the debtor's proposed chapter 13 plan.
Ruling: 
Denial of confirmation vacated due to failure to consider Social Security income in evaluation of feasibility.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Ranta v. Gorman. 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 July 01,2013, LexisNexis #0713-134

In re Braswell

Petitioner debtor filed an amended chapter 13 plan of reorganization. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325, respondent trustee objected to confirmation of the debtor's amended plan on a number of grounds, most notably on grounds of lack of good faith and the failure to provide interest to unsecured claimants in the debtor's 100% plan. The court held a confirmation hearing and issued its ruling.
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied due to lack of accommodation for the time value of money in payment of unsecured creditors.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Braswell. 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 June 27,2013, LexisNexis #0813-101

In re Holm

A chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the debtors' plan pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b) on the grounds that some of the expenses claimed for the benefit of the debtors' son were not reasonable and necessary under 11 U.S.C.S. § 707(b)(2)(A)(ii)(II).
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied due to excessive expenses for debtor's business and recreation and entertainment of bi-polar adult son.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Holm. 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 June 19,2013, LexisNexis #0713-065

In re Luedtke

Chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the debtors' plan under the "disposable income" requirement of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b)(1).
Ruling: 
Old vehicle expense consistent with IRS guidelines could be deducted from disposable income calculation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Luedtke. 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 June 17,2013, LexisNexis #0713-133

In re Ramos

Debtor filed a petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and proposed a plan for paying her creditors which paid arrears in the amount of $1,832 which she owed to a bank, taxes she owed, and her attorney's fees in the amount of $2,750, but paid unsecured creditors approximately five percent of what they were owed. A trustee who was appointed to administer the debtor's plan filed an objection to confirmation of the plan.
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied due to failure to provide information necessary to allow debtor to retain tax refunds.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Ramos. 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 June 04,2013, LexisNexis #0613-137

In re Carreiro

This case came on for hearing upon debtor's Motion to Approve Early Payoff of Chapter 13 Plan and Request for Fees.
Ruling: 
Early payoff of chapter 13 plan denied as unsecured creditors would not be paid in full.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Carreiro. 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 May 30,2013, LexisNexis #0613-101

Branigan v. Davis (in re Davis)

Plaintiff, a chapter 13 bankruptcy trustee, challenged confirmation orders, entered by the bankruptcy court and affirmed by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt, stripping off junior liens against debtors' residences.
Ruling: 
Stripping of valueless liens is permitted in post-BAPCPA "chapter 20" cases.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Branigan v. Davis (in re Davis). 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 May 10,2013, LexisNexis #0613-028

In re Harkins

Trustee filed objections to confirmation in three chapter 13 cases, taking the position that these self-employed debtors could not subtract their business expenses from gross receipts for the purpose of calculating current monthly income and that therefore the applicable commitment period was five years instead of three years.
Ruling: 
Self-employed debtors could not subtract business expenses from gross receipts in current monthly income calculation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Harkins. 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 May 01,2013, LexisNexis #0513-095

Pages

Subscribe to § 1325(b)