Skip to main content

§ 1322(a)

In re Diaz

Ruling
Creditor not entitled to attorneys' fees for protection of security interest where no protection was required.
Procedural posture

The chapter 13 debtors filed an objection to a creditor's claim for attorney's fees for protection of its security. The debtors objected to paying any attorney's fees because their mortgage loan was current on the petition date and was being paid outside the plan.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Diaz 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 01, 2010 , LexisNexis #0510-130

In re Penaran

Ruling
Plan confirmed over objection of state family services agency.
Procedural posture

The debtor filed an objection to the claim of the creditor, Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (IHFS), for a domestic support obligation arrearage of nearly $ 49,000. The creditor moved to dismiss the debtor's case, and the debtor asserted that the creditor had violated the automatic stay by instituting a postpetition garnishment and the suspension of the debtor's driver's license.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on February 03, 2010 , LexisNexis #0410-096

In re Sosa

Ruling
Confirmation denied where plan did not give county agency sufficient notice of treatment of child support arrearage.
Procedural posture

Bankruptcy debtors proposed a plan which provided for minimal payments for a substantial child support arrearage being collected by a county agency. The bankruptcy trustee objected to confirmation of the plan.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on January 21, 2010 , LexisNexis #0310-055

In re Edwards

Ruling
Child support arrearage was subordinated due to assignment but plan confirmation was denied due to lack of meaningful notice to asignee.
Procedural posture

Bankruptcy debtors proposed a chapter 13 plan which provided for less than full payment of a child support arrearage which was assigned to a state agency. The bankruptcy trustee objected to confirmation of the debtor's plan.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on January 20, 2010 , LexisNexis #0310-056

In re Egeland

Ruling
Payments held by trustee pending resolution of chapter 13 debtor's dispute with creditor could be paid to creditor following voluntary dismissal of case.
Procedural posture

Chapter 13 debtors voluntarily dismissed their case in August of 2009. The trustee was holding funds pending resolution of a dispute between the debtors and a creditor bank. The creditor moved for disbursement of the funds to it.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on January 13, 2010 , LexisNexis #0310-025

In re Trupp

Ruling
Objection to confirmation of debtor's plan sustained on behalf of former spouse but overruled with regard to state support agency.
Procedural posture

A bankruptcy debtor's chapter 13 plan not provide for full payment of pre- petition child support arrearages owed to both the debtor's former spouse and to a state agency. The state objected to confirmation of the debtor's plan on the ground that 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(a)(2) required the debtor to pay both the obligation owed to the agency and the obligation owed to the spouse in full.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on December 08, 2009 , LexisNexis #0110-064

In re Carey

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

DeHart v. Baden (In re Baden)

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

In re Fitzgerald

Ruling
IRS Trust Fund Recovery penalty was personal to the debtors and had to be provided for in plan.
Procedural posture

Chapter 13 debtors objected to a proof of claim filed by the IRS, and the IRS objected to the confirmation of the debtors'plan under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(a)(2).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Fitzgerald 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 10, 2008 , LexisNexis #0209-127

In re Griffin

Ruling
Domestic support obligations being collected by state were priority claims that were required to be paid in full during term of plan.
Procedural posture

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, and submitted a proposed plan. The Alabama Department of Human Resources (DHR) objected to the confirmation of the proposed plan, claiming that pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 507, the DHR's priority claims needed to be paid in full during the term of the plan.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 30, 2008 , LexisNexis #0708-089