Meyer v. Lepe (In re Lepe), 470 B.R. 851, 856–62 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2012) (Pappas, Dunn, Markell)

Not bad faith that plan strips wholly unsecured junior lien and pays at least 17.5% of resulting unsecured claims. Debtor was not balance-sheet insolvent. Filing solely to strip unsecured lien is not prohibited when other good-faith factors favor debtor. Citing Goeb v. Heid (In re Goeb), 675 F.2d 1386 (9th Cir. May 3, 1982) (Choy, Schroeder, Hatter), “in this circuit, a good faith determination in connection with chapter 13 plan confirmation cannot be based on any single factor or feature of a proposed plan, to the exclusion of review of all other relevant information. Importantly, it is of no moment that a single factor may be indicative of bad faith, or that a specific plan feature is not consistent with the ‘spirit of chapter 13’ or may indicate manipulation of the Bankruptcy Code. Factors indicating good and bad faith may not be considered in isolation, but must always be weighed against the totality of the circumstances in each case. . . . The Ninth Circuit has held that the debtor’s insolvency, while relevant, is not a requirement for finding that a debtor has proposed a plan in good faith in a chapter 11 case. . . . The Ninth Circuit has also held that a debtor’s chapter 13 plan may strip the lien of a creditor holding a claim secured by the debtor’s house where there is no value to support that lien . . . . Lepe’s amended plan therefore proposes to do only that which the Bankruptcy Code allows. As a result, the plan’s lien-strip provision, standing alone, cannot support a finding that Lepe lacked good faith.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

image002
July 16, 2023
Remember Mort. Corp. of the South v. Bozeman (In re Bozeman), 57 F. 4th 895 (11th Cir. 2023)? That was the recent 11th Circuit case previously reviewed by Lawrence Ahern on this site. It was the Chapter 13 version of The Perfect Storm.  The Debtor proposed to pay the principal balance of her mortgage ($17 . . . It looks...
Members
NBR cropped 2
June 25, 2023
Dear Readers: By now, I’m hoping that all of you are aware of the sad story of the plaintiff’s lawyers in Mata v. Avianca, Inc., Case No. 22-cv-1461 (PKC) (S.D.N.Y).  Lawyer A used ChatGPT to “research” a brief; Lawyer A was not admitted in the jurisdiction, so Lawyer B (same firm) entered a notice of appearance; Lawyer B filed Lawyer...
Members
September 19, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) In order for a bankruptcy court to impose sanctions for contempt, Taggart compelsa finding of a violation of a clear and unambiguous order; the bankruptcy court lacks inherent power to issue punitive sanctions under Rule 3002.1. (Jacobs) PHH Mortgage Corporation v. Sensenich, 6 F.4th 503 (2nd Cir. August 2,...
Members
August 22, 2021
By Cathy Moran, Esq., (Redwood City, CA) When a married couple books a bankruptcy consultation, you have an immediate problem: There be dragons, as early map makers helpfully provided. Because, as a lawyer friend of mine says: Anytime there are two people sitting across from you, you have a conflict of interest. That pithy expression has stuck with me and...
Members
June 28, 2020
By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) Long after the human patients recover from the coronavirus, small businesses will still be ailing. And long nights will be spent deciding whether to try to stay in business. As bankruptcy lawyers, we’re going to see people in pain trying to assess what to do next. Business owners may see the exit heading...
Members
April 28, 2019
By William Houston Brown, Co-chair of the Commission and Adviser to the Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education The Report of the Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy for improvements to the consumer bankruptcy system was made public on April 11, 2019. The full report is available free by download from the American Bankruptcy Institute’s website, www.abi.org. The following Foreward to the Report...
Members
ahern_larry_regular
February 27, 2022
Background A recent Chapter 7 case out of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California, In re Rhodes,1 addressed reaffirmation in a context that should be of interest to debtor's attorneys. As explained in Part 1, Rhodes points out that the "ride-through" of a debtor's secured debt after a Chapter 7 — which Congress . . . It...
Members
January 6, 2019
By Academy Staff In July of 2016 ConsiderChapter13.org posted an article, “Another Arrow in the Quiver of the ‘Less Than Honest Debtor’.” That article addressed a decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee in In re Hurt, 2015 WL 9592064 (Bankr. E.D. Tn. 2015), in which the Court overruled the Trustee’s objection to exemptions. In Hurt,...
Members
February 2, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Punitive damages reduced for FDCPA and RESPA violations. The mortgage servicer violated FDCPA, RESPA and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act by treating account as delinquent after Chapter 13 debtor had cured arrears, brought account current and obtained discharge. The servicer mistakenly marked the Chapter 13 case as dismissed rather...
Members
Danielle headshot (2)
December 3, 2023
Attorney Gueck-Townsend provides readers with a primer on evidence needed to prove losses.
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: