Section 1329(c), as it currently exists, forecloses the ability of Chapter 13 debtor to modify a confirmed plan to alter the plan payment amount while maintaining an extended plan, previously approved under the CARES Act. (Hanan) In re Nelson, 2022 WL 6795096 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. October 11, 2022) Case Summary Immediately after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress sought...
From the Editor’s Desk – Claims
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)
Chapter 7 debtor lacked standing to appeal from order finding no standing to seek claim disallowance. The debtor did not demonstrate “person aggrieved” standing to appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order that she lacked standing to sue for disallowance of a claim. It was a no-asset case, and the debtor did not show financial interest in the claim’s allowance, since she did not show a surplus of assets that would allow distribution to her. Khan v. Regions Bank (In re Khan), ___ Fed.Appx . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or sign in below:
Related Articles
Put Me In Coach, I’m Ready To Play
Tax Projections and the Means Test – Parts I and II
Why Your Bankruptcy Client Doesn’t Understand You (And How to Fix the Problem)
From the Editor – Claims
Meet a New AND Newish Trustee
Critical Case Comment–84 Months: Lifesaver or Anchor?
Thoughts on Zealous Advocacy: When Do Bankruptcy Lawyers Cross the Line? Part 1 History of Zealous Advocacy
Critical Case Comment – You Can’t Have Your Cake and Eat it Too
Quick Confirmation – BAP Says Not So Fast
Bozeman Revisited: The Anti-Modification Clause Chisels Away at Espinosa