Search Opinion

In re Miller

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(a) (hanging paragraph referencing paragraph 5), a creditor objected to the debtors' chapter 13 plan on the basis that it failed to pay the full amount of the creditor's secured claim in a vehicle.
Ruling: 
Confirmation denied where plan proposed paying less than full value of purchase money security interest in "910 vehicle" even after exclusion of negative equity, gap insurance and administrative fees.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Miller. 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 December 23,2008, LexisNexis #0309-089

In re Nelson

The court ruled on creditors' objections to nonstandard language added to Paragraph V.G. in four proposed chapter 13 plan confirmations.
Ruling: 
Model plan language added to paragraphs dealing with mortgage payments in four chapter 13 plans was disapproved resulting in denial of confirmation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Nelson. 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 December 23,2008, LexisNexis #0909-010

Hernandez v. Dorado (In re Dorado)

A chapter 13 trustee objected to the confirmation of a debtor's plan, rebutting the debtor's disposable income determination under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b)(3).
Ruling: 
Breach of home construction contract did not give rise to nondischargeable debt.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Hernandez v. Dorado (In re Dorado). 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 December 16,2008, LexisNexis #0209-045

In re Tabares

The debtors filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. A bank filed a claim, which included a request for $350 in postpetition attorney fees as part of the claim. A trustee objected to the claim to the extent that it sought the attorney fees.
Ruling: 
Trustee's objection to mortgagee's attorneys' fees sustained absent necessary contractual provision.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Tabares. 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 December 15,2008, LexisNexis #0309-079

In re Arrigo

The matter came before the court on confirmation of the Second Amended Chapter 13 Plan filed by debtors, and the objection thereto filed by the Standing Chapter 13 Trustee.
Ruling: 
Trustee's objection to confirmation overruled as there was no substantial change in circumstances to warrant deviation from Form 22C projected disposable income calculation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Arrigo. 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 December 04,2008, LexisNexis #0209-129

In re McCauley

Debtors filed a motion to confirm their amended plan. A secured creditor filed an objection to confirmation on the grounds that the "hanging paragraph" at the end of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(a) prevented the debtors from cramming down the creditor's secured claim on their vehicle pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 506(a).
Ruling: 
"910 vehicle" loan was precluded from modifications only to extent of purchase money security interest which did not include negative equity on trade-in.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re McCauley. 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 November 20,2008, LexisNexis #0209-018

In re Hudak

The debtor's fourth amended chapter 13 plan of reorganization was before the court. A limited objection thereto filed by her mortgage creditor asserted that certain provisions impermissibly modified the contractual deed of trust rights and lien claim in violation of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b). The debtor argued that the creditor's future failure to comply with the specified language would violate the discharge injunction under 11 U.S.C.S. § 524(i).
Ruling: 
Plan requirement that creditor deem prepetition arrearage contractually current upon confirmation was not an impermissible modification.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Hudak. 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 October 24,2008, LexisNexis #1108-128

In re Hudak

A debtor filed a fourth amended chapter 13 plan of reorganization. A creditor filed a limited objection to the plan, alleging that certain provisions impermissibly modified its secured lien in contravention of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(2) and were otherwise violative of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(5). The creditor also alleged that 11 U.S.C.S. § 524(i) did not apply.
Ruling: 
Confirmation of debtor's fourth amended chapter 13 plan denied due to impermissible modification of creditor's secured lien.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Hudak. 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 October 20,2008, LexisNexis #1208-053

In re Brown

Debtors sought confirmation of their chapter 13 plan, but the trustee objected to the proposed 42 month plan that would not pay all unsecured creditors in full as being contrary to requirements of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1325(b)(1)(B).
Ruling: 
Above median debtor could not propose plan with shorter term than required that did not pay unsecured creditors in full.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Brown. 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 October 10,2008, LexisNexis #0109-026

Suelflow v. Ambank (In re Suelflow)

Plaintiff bankruptcy debtor brought an adversary proceeding against defendant judgment creditor alleging that the creditor's judicial lien constituted a preferential transfer, and seeking under 11 U.S.C.S. § 522(f) to avoid the lien which impaired the debtor's homestead exemption. The debtor moved for summary judgment.
Ruling: 
Debtor could claim new higher homestead exemption in order to avoid lien filed prior to increase in amount of exemption by state.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Suelflow v. Ambank (In re Suelflow). 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 October 10,2008, LexisNexis #0209-009

Pages