Spending every dollar they make, and then some, is often how our Chapter 13 clients got into financial trouble. Yet Chapter 13, as practiced, validates the practice of continuing to spend 100% of each month’s income during the life of the plan. In doing so, we, as a society, squander the chance to use Chapter 13 to teach new budgeting...
Critical Case Comment: Sikes v. Crager
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee
Sikes v. Crager, 2011 WL 4591889 (W. D. La, Sept. 30, 2011) (Hicks)
A Chapter 13 plan proposing to pay only attorney’s fees and with little or no meaningful distribution to creditors is a plan not proposed in good faith.
Case Summary
Patricia Crager’s only source of income was Social Security and food stamps. She had four unsecured debt obligations totaling $7,855.27 and a monthly mortgage payment of $327.10. She filed a Chapter 13 petition, proposing to . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Leading a Winning Team
Why Creditors Should Get Less in Chapter 13
“How Long, O Lord?”
Assessing the Ailing Business Post Pandemic
Eviction Diversion Programs and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
Student Loans Debacle-Part II: Failure to Forgive – The Ticking Time-Bomb
From the Editor – Dismissal
Are Direct Payments by Debtor on Mortgage Considered Payments “Under the Plan” for Purposes of Discharge?
Postpetition Borrowing by a Consumer Debtor in Chapter 13 – Part 2 of 2
Ask Ms. Ps & Qs