CRITICAL CASE COMMENT: In re Henderson

In re Henderson, 2011 WL 1467934 (Bankr. D. Idaho, April 18, 2011) (Pappas)

A Chapter 13 debtor with no calculated projected disposable income, the applicable commitment period need not propose a minimum duration of a plan; Kagenveama still has some validity.

Case Summary

The Hendersons’ Schedules I and J revealed monthly net income of $1,140. The calculations on their 22C, however, yielded a negative disposable income of -$184. The difference between the I and J income and the 22C income was because the 22C “expenses” were greater than their actual expenses . . .

It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.

Or Sign In Below:

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Critical Case Comment – New Bankruptcy Term – “Sale Plan”

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

January 1, 2023

Confirmation of a “sale” plan (proposing the sale of the debtor’s principal residence) depends upon how quickly the sale will be consummated, milestones established, and consequences for failing to meet those deadlines; a plan that makes payments to the mortgage company under a “sale” plan may not modify the rights of the mortgagee but if care is taken to comply...

Members

Critical Case Comment – The Now Infamous Castleman Case

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

August 20, 2023

Equity that accrues as a result of market conditions in debtor’s assets between the time of confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan and conversion to Chapter 7 constitutes property of the estate which may be administered by the Chapter 7 trustee.

Members

Engaging a Non-Profit to Solve the Chapter 13 Trustees PSLF Conundrum

March 8, 2020

By Ed Boltz, The Law Offices of John T. Orcutt, P.C. (Durham, NC) and Sarah Beth Withers, Inner Banks Legal Services (Washington, NC) DISCLAIMER: This article is not meant to provide specific advice about the formation of a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation or the tax or other consequences of such. At most, this is intended to encourage Chapter 13 trustees and...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Repeat: No Fee Splitting

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

October 23, 2022

A referral fee by retained special counsel paid to debtor’s attorney violates the prohibition in § 504 in that it constitutes an unauthorized splitting of attorney’s fees. (Williamson) In re Davis, 638 B.R. 198 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. March 31, 2022) Case Summary Four years after Lisa Davis filed her Chapter 13 petition, she was involved in an auto accident resulting...

Members

Evidentiary Issues Arising from Attempts to Prove Alleged “Facts” Stated in The Monster Mash

October 27, 2019

By Alexander Schmidt1, Law Clerk, and The Honorable John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Toledo) You have never heard – or seen – the Monster Mash. What have you heard, is a song ABOUT the Monster Mash. Let that sink in for a minute. Inevitably, that leads to the obvious question: What facts...

Members

Meet a New Trustee

The Academy

December 19, 2021

One of our very newest trustees is very familiar to many of us. After serving ten years as Chief of Staff (a/k/a Staff Attorney) to Martha Bronitsky, on August 1, 2021, Nima Ghazvini was appointed Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Districts of Hawaii, Guam, and Northern Mariana Islands. What you may not know is that Ghazvini was born in...

From the Editor – Dismissal

August 2, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Undistributed funds returned to debtor upon dismissal. Under § 1327(b)’s vesting requirement, unless a confirmed plan provides otherwise, any undistributed funds held by the trustee at dismissal of the case must be returned to the debtor. Although not necessary to rely on § 347(b)(3), the conclusion on effect of vesting at confirmation was...

Members

Of Tax Refunds, Exemptions, Setoffs, and Roman Gods

April 18, 2021

By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) If you’re looking for a well-written and clear appellate opinion about a much-litigated topic, with a bit of ancient mythology thrown in for good measure, this HUD’s for you. The case is Wood v. U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (In re Larry and...

Members

Diane Cipollone

The Academy

March 6, 2022

Diane Cipollone is an attorney and a qualified expert on mortgage servicing and loan origination matters. While Diane no longer provides expert testimony, she continues to consult with consumer attorneys; trains attorneys, court mediators, housing counselors and fair housing advocates on foreclosure prevention guidelines and federal mortgage regulations; and mentors pro bono attorneys and non-profit housing counselors. She has presented...

Is a CARES Act Stimulus Payment Exempt?

April 26, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction Since April 1, 2020, many unemployed people in the United States have begun to receive "a recovery benefit" in the amount of $1,200.1 These payments, under the CARES Act2 stimulus program, were intended to provide some relief to suffering Americans. However, the most financially distressed Americans, perhaps with existing,...

Members