- 11 U.S.C.
In re Russell
Dec
31
2013
Ruling
Plan paying higher dividend to creditors with cosigned consumer debts than to other unsecured creditors could be confirmed.
Issue(s)
Did plan proposing to pay a higher dividend to holders of cosigned consumer debts than to other general unsecured creditors unfairly discriminate.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Russell Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
Copeland v. Fink (In re Copeland)
Nov
20
2012
Ruling
Unsecured non-priority tax claim properly denied special treatment under confirmed plan.
Procedural posture
Debtors challenged the order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri confirming their amended chapter 13 plan. Appellee was the Trustee.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Copeland v. Fink (In re Copeland) 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
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Quiles
Oct
18
2012
Ruling
Confirmation of plan denied due to improper separate classification of student loan debt incurred by debtor for child.
Procedural posture
Bankruptcy debtors proposed a plan which provided for inclusion of student loan debt for which the debtors co-signed in a classification of co-signed debts which received more favorable treatment than other unsecured debts. The bankruptcy trustee objected to confirmation of the plan based on unfair discrimination among unsecured creditors as prohibited by 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Quiles Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Rivera
Sep
10
2012
Ruling
Plan confirmed over objection of trustee to separate classification of claim for which guarantor was liable.
Procedural posture
Bankruptcy debtors proposed a plan which provided for separate classification of a claim based on a loan to one debtor for which a close relative was also liable as a guarantor, and payment of the unsecured portion of the claim in full. The bankruptcy trustee objected to confirmation of the debtors' plan based on unfair discrimination among unsecured creditors in violation of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Rivera Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
Meyer v. Renteria (In re Renteria)
May
04
2012
Ruling
Plan containing provision preferring co-debtor consumer claim over other unsecured claims properly confirmed over objections.
Procedural posture
Chapter 13 trustee challenged an order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California confirming debtor's chapter 13 plan over objections that it did not comply with 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1) as it afforded preferential treatment to a claim on which debtor's mother was a codebtor. At issue was the effect of the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-353, 98 Stat. 333 (1984).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Meyer v. Renteria (In re Renteria) 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
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Renteria
Apr
26
2012
Ruling
Confirmation denied due to unfair discrimination against unsecured creditors in favor of student loan creditors.
Procedural posture
Below-median income debtors filed a petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and proposed a plan for repaying their creditors. A trustee who was appointed to administer the debtors' plan filed an objection to confirmation of the plan, claiming that it unfairly discriminated among unsecured creditors.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Renteria Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Birts
Feb
27
2012
Ruling
Plan providing for payment of student loan debt outside plan did not unfairly discriminate and could be confirmed.
Procedural posture
A chapter 13 trustee objected to a debtor's proposed plan, which provided for payment to her student loan creditor outside the plan, on the grounds that it unfairly discriminated within the meaning of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Birts Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Taylor
Oct
19
2011
Ruling
Agreement to provide bank with contract rate, rather than Till rate, of interest approved.
Procedural posture
Secured creditor bank filed an objection to confirmation of a debtor's chapter 13 plan. The debtor, the bank, and the chapter 13 trustee filed a proposed Agreed Order in order to resolve the objection.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Taylor Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
In re King
Sep
23
2011
Ruling
Plan that paid more to student loan creditors than to other unsecured creditors did not unfairly discriminate.
Procedural posture
A chapter 13 trustee filed an objection to the debtors' amended chapter 13 plan, alleging that the plan violated the unfair discrimination requirements of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1) because student loan creditors would receive returns of 27 percent to 92 percent of the face amount of their claims, while non-student loan creditors would only recover 25 percent of their claims.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re King Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Renteria
Aug
01
2011
Ruling
Unfair discrimination test was not applicable to consumer debt for attorneys' fees incurred in family law litigation.
Procedural posture
Chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the Chapter 13 plan filed by the debtor. The trustee contended that the plan unfairly discriminated against unsecured creditors in violation of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Renteria Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
: