Warfield v. Salazar (In re Salazar), 465 B.R. 875, 880–82 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2012) (Dunn, Jury, Pappas)

Although literal application of § 348(f)(1)(A) can be anomalous, when good faith is not at issue, prepetition tax refund spent by debtors during Chapter 13 case before conversion is not “in possession” of debtors and is excluded from property of Chapter 7 estate. In a Chapter 13 case filed in September of 2008 and converted to Chapter 7 in August of 2009, the debtors received tax refunds based upon 2008 state and federal tax returns and spent those refunds on living expenses. “[T]he debtor’s use of estate property in chapter 13 prior to conversion to chapter 7 is subject to ‘good faith’ scrutiny. . . . [A] plain meaning application of § 348(f)(1)(A) creates an anomaly . . . . Had the Salazars remained in chapter 13, they would have been required to account to their creditors for the Prepetition Refund even though it had been spent. . . . The value of the Prepetition Refund would have been included in the hypothetical chapter 7 liquidation in the Salazars’ chapter 13 case. . . . [I]f their case had commenced as a chapter 7, the Salazars would have been required to turn over the Prepetition Refund to the Trustee. . . . While . . . application of the plain language of § 348(f)(1) may be anomalous, . . . we do not believe such anomaly equates to producing absurd results or creating a clear contradiction in the statutory scheme in light of the remedies available to chapter 7 trustees where the debtors have not acted in good faith. . . . [T]he Salazars spent the Prepetition Refund in good faith to pay ordinary and necessary living expenses during the period from the petition date to the conversion date. . . . [T]he plain meaning of the language used in § 348(f)(1)(A) excluded the Prepetition Refund from property of the chapter 7 estate.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

June 23, 2019
By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) Let’s take the following set of facts and see how it plays out in the labyrinthian world of hardship discharge of student loan debt. The case is In re Lozada (Lozada v. Educational Credit Management Corporation), 594 B.R. 212 (Bankr. S.D. N.Y. 2018). Years ago (30...
Members
January 13, 2019
By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 of 6 Click here for Part 2 of 6 Click here for Part 4 of 6 Click here for Part 5 of 6
Members
August 1, 2021
By Cathy Moran, Esq., (Redwood City, CA) Eighteen years elapsed between the close of the 2003 tax year and the Tax Court’s 2021 decision Barnes v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2021-49 (U.S.T.C. May 4, 2021) regarding the debtors’ 2003 tax liability. While the most recent decision in the debtors’ battle with the IRS challenged the discretion of a tax officer in...
Members
March 24, 2019
By Wm. Houston Brown, United States Bankruptcy Judge (Retired) Discharge - Direct mortgage payments unpaid by debtor were not “provided for” in plan. The confirmed plan stated that the debtor would directly pay two home mortgages to the credit union, but there was no specification of payment terms or other treatment of those mortgages. At the time of confirmation, the...
Members
February 2, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Class action certification on predominance. The Eleventh Circuit remanded, finding that the District Court had abused its discretion in refusing to certify a class on a predominance theory for former debtors who had obtained discharge of personal liability on residential mortgages and who asserted violations of the FDCPA by a loan servicer. The...
Members
May 26, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction In Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC (In re Jackson Masonry, LLC),1 the Sixth Circuit reviewed circuit authority on finality of orders for appellate purposes and affirmed the district court's dismissal of an appeal from an order denying stay relief. The Court of Appeals said that, under 28...
Members
October 6, 2019
By Mike Fitzgerald It has been almost one full year since I retired as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee in Seattle. I am happy to report that my family and I are enjoying ourselves immensely. As retirement grows more comfortable, I find myself looking back with mostly very fond memories at the nineteen years I served as a Trustee, as...
Members
October 20, 2019
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Claimant in proof of claim lacking prima facie validity was sanctioned. The proof of claim secured by the debtor’s residence failed to satisfy Rule 3001(c)(2)(C) requirements, including incomplete Form B 410A with no payment history. The claimant’s attempt to amend the claim on the eve of the contested objection to claim would defeat...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
January 7, 2024
Court lacks authority to extend stay in a case with a one-time repeat filer within a year of the previous case especially where the matter is tardily raised.
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
September 24, 2023
In calculating projected disposable income, 13 debtor may deduct entire mortgage payment notwithstanding amount exceeds the housing allowance as established by the IRS Financial Standards Allowance.
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: