- 11 U.S.C.
In re Wegscheid
Jan
29
2007
Ruling
Wholly unsecured creditor's lien could be stripped off upon plan completion.
Procedural posture
The debtor's chapter 13 plan provided that a creditor's second lien would be treated as a general unsecured claim and discharged upon completion of the plan. The debtor completed all plan payments and obtained a discharge. The debtor then filed a motion to avoid the creditor's lien under 11 U.S.C. §§ 506(a) and 1322(b)(2), and the creditor objected to the motion.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Wegscheid 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 Freeman
Dec
22
2006
Ruling
Plan could include interest payments on unsecured nondischargeable debt.
Procedural posture
The debtor's proposed chapter 13 plan provided, inter alia, that the debtor would continue to maintain direct payments on her unsecured student loan debt. The chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the proposed plan on the ground that the plan violated 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(10), which prohibited payment of postpetition interest on an unsecured, non-dischargeable debt unless the debtor proposed to pay all other allowed claims in full.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Freeman 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 Shepherd
Nov
03
2006
Ruling
Mobile home qualified as "debtor's principal residence" so that anti-modification provisions applied.
Procedural posture
Creditor objected to the confirmation of chapter 13 debtor's plan.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Shepherd 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 Tewell
Oct
23
2006
Ruling
Failure to allow mortgage creditor to enforce "due on sale clause" would be an impermissible modification.
Procedural posture
Movant creditor, a mortgagee, sought an order pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) annulling or modifying an automatic stay that arose upon debtor's filing of a bankruptcy proceeding. At issue was whether the creditor could assert its rights under a due-on-sale clause as "cause"for relief from the stay under section 362(d)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Tewell 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 Pora
Oct
17
2006
Ruling
Plan confirmation denied due to discrimination between student loan creditor and other unsecured creditors.
Procedural posture
A bankruptcy debtor proposed a plan which provided a minimal dividend to unsecured creditors but treated student loan debt as long-term debt under 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(5), which received a substantially greater dividend. The trustee objected to confirmation of the plan on the ground that it discriminated between unsecured creditors in violation of section 1322(b)(1).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Pora 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 Lammy
Oct
11
2006
Ruling
Proof of claim could not include arrearage that was subject of prepetition loan modification.
Procedural posture
Chapter 13 debtors objected to creditor's claim and creditor filed a motion to allow the claim.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lammy 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 Coover
Sep
28
2006
Ruling
Plan procedure to definitively ascertain amount owed to secured creditor was not an impermissible modification.
Procedural posture
Claimants, home mortgage creditors, objected to language contained in a form chapter 13 plan proposed and recommended by the chapter 13 trustee for the judicial district. At issue was whether the issue was ripe, whether the language was internally inconsistent, whether the language violated 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2), whether language noting that the proviso was subject to modification by a subsequent court order was properly added.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Coover Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
Scarborough v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp.
Aug
28
2006
Ruling
Anti-modification provision did not preclude bifurcation of mortgage secured by income- producing rental property.
Procedural posture
Appellant debtor, during chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings, sought under 11 U.S.C. § 506(a) to bifurcate appellee mortgage holder's claim. The bankruptcy court found that 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2) precluded the debtor from bifurcating the claim, and the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania affirmed. The debtor appealed.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Scarborough v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
- 11 U.S.C.
In re Mayer-Myers
Jun
15
2006
Ruling
Court denied confirmation since debtors had no right to modify creditor's rights under plan.
Procedural posture
Debtor proposed a chapter 13 bankruptcy plan that sought to modify the claim of creditor, a mortgagee. Creditor objected to the confirmation of the chapter 13 plan, arguing that it violated the anti-modification directive set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2).
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Mayer-Myers Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
:
- 11 U.S.C.
Thomas v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc. (In re Thomas)
Jun
13
2006
Ruling
Court deemed that debtors could modify creditor's rights since escrow funds in mortgage instrument took mortgage out of anti-modification protection.
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs, debtors, filed a complaint against defendant creditor seeking a determination of the creditor's secured status. The debtors moved for partial summary judgment. The issues were whether: (1) the creditor's secured interest fell within the antimodification provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2), (2) judicial estoppel applied due to the creditor's assertion of the property's value in an earlier proceeding.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Thomas v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc. (In re Thomas) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Court
: