By William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. and Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown and Ahern (Nashville, TN) In two February opinions, the Supreme Court addressed issues that appear in bankruptcy cases, one dealing with a common practice of entering nunc pro tunc orders and the other affecting determination of property rights under state law. In a...
Critical Case Comment
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee
In re Moore, 482 B.R. 248 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. Nov. 1, 2012) (Gorman)
Where a debtor’s payments on an automobile are virtually certain to end, the “ownership allowance” permitted by the IRS Local Transportation Standards terminates and the debtor’s projected disposable income must “step up” after such secured claim is satisfied.
Case Summary
The debtors had over median income and were thus subject to a 60-month applicable commitment period. They proposed a chapter 13 plan which would . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Travis Sasser
Tax Projections and the Means Test – Part II
CFPB Proposes Changes to HMDA Rules
Disregarding Bankruptcy Protections Can be Costly: How Courts Decide Punitive Damages Awards for Stay Violations
Progeny of Law v. Siegel: Sixth and Ninth Circuits Say Right to Dismiss Chapter 13 Case is Absolute, Not Qualified by Section 105
There is NO MORE Form 1040A or 1040EZ – Six New Schedules Some Taxpayers Will File with New Form 1040
Two Supreme Court Decisions with Effects on Bankruptcy Practice
TFS Bill Pay Announces New Attorney Report Center
Legal Aid and Who Are Our Chapter 13 “Customers”
Max’s Knowledge Nugget