Hamilton v. Lanning

Projected disposable income calculation should be presumed correct, but may be rebutted by evidence of a substantial change in circumstances.
Procedural posture: 
A bankruptcy court confirmed a chapter 13 plan, considering respondent debtor's actual income for "projected disposable income" (PDI) under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b)(1)(B). An appellate panel and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed, holding that evidence of a substantial change in the debtor's circumstances could be used under a forward looking approach. Certiorari was granted on petitioner trustee's petition.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Hamilton v. Lanning. 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 07,2010, LexisNexis #0610-133