From the Editor - Modification of Plan • NACTT Academy

From the Editor – Modification of Plan

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)

Trustee could not modify plan to increase dividend or term but debtors were bound by plan language. When debtors had paid the plan’s 74% dividend in the 55th month of the confirmed plan, the trustee was unable to modify the plan to change the percentage return to unsecured creditors; however, the trustee’s motion was more properly characterized as one to enforce the total plan provisions. The plan provided that unsecured creditors would receive “74% or a pro-rata share of $_________ [an uncompleted blank space], whichever is . . .

It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.

Or Sign In Below:

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Five More Things Debtors Should Know About the SBRA of 2019

December 22, 2019

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part VII Introduction This series focuses on four bankruptcy-related bills that were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019. One bill, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), will be effective February 19, 2020. It appears in its entirety in Appendix B to...

Members

Another Defeat of Bifurcated Chapter 7 Fees

The Honorable William Houston Brown

February 11, 2024

Recent case authority has not been favorable for consumer debtor attorneys seeking approval of bifurcated fees in Chapter 7 cases.

Members

Courts are Expanding the Protections of Bankruptcy Rule 3002.1

Debbie Langehennig, Cameron Kelly

October 9, 2022

As a prerequisite to a claim’s payment, Rule 3002.1 requires certain secured creditors to provide to the trustee and the debtor notice of the full value of the secured creditor’s claim, including any “fees, expenses, and charges” related to the claim. Two bankruptcy courts have demonstrated a willingness to expand the reach of Rule 3002.1’s noticing requirements. These courts generally...

Members

Don’t Be Dismissive – Rule 41

Cathy Moran

August 6, 2023

I was the third attorney on this lien avoidance matter. Instead of it being “third time’s the charm”, it came close to being “three strikes and you’re out.” All because of FRBP 7041. This was the set up: debtor’s original counsel filed a number of lien avoidance actions, including the one against a landlord with a large default judgment. The...

Members

Measuring Success in Chapter 13: Successful Dismissals and Conversions

Honorable Brian D. Lynch

July 16, 2023

A. Introduction When should we regard dismissal or conversion of a chapter 13 as an unsuccessful bankruptcy? The arguments are familiar.Chapter 13 is the easiest, quickest, and cheapest way to stop foreclosures, repossessions, and garnishments by creditors.Desperate debtors can file a chapter 13 case without schedules, statements, or a plan and buy themselves a stay for a short period. And...

Members

United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa Ten Years After

May 3, 2020

By Hon. Brian Lynch, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Western District of Washington, Tacoma Division When the Supreme Court issued United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa1 on March 23, 2010, commentators were perplexed.2 On the one hand, the Court upheld the 9th Circuit’s ruling allowing a hardship discharge of student loans in a chapter 13 plan. The Court held that...

Members

Bifurcated Fees Under Examination

The Honorable William Houston Brown

May 22, 2022

Bankruptcy and appellate courts in increasing numbers are considering whether it is appropriate for debtors filing for Chapter 7 relief and attorneys representing them to enter into bifurcated fee agreements. It has been recognized that one of the reasons that debtors may decide to file Chapter 13 rather than Chapter 7 is that attorneys require payment of the Chapter 7...

Members

Critical Case Comment – No Approval No Pay

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

May 15, 2022

It is incumbent upon nonbankruptcy attorneys, including personal injury attorneys, to verify on PACER that their client is not a debtor and that the cause of action as to which they represent their client is not property of the estate; failure to obtain approval of the bankruptcy court for representing a debtor or settlement of a personal injury action is...

Two Supreme Court Decisions with Effects on Bankruptcy Practice

March 1, 2020

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...

Members

Critical Case Comment– Reverse Mortgage May be Modified

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

May 22, 2022

A reverse mortgage, having fallen due as a result of the death of the borrower, is not protected from modification by the borrower’s heirs by virtue of § 1322(c)(2). (Halfenger) In re Sandoval, 2022 WL 982182 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. March 31, 2022) Case Summary Juan Sandoval filed Chapter 13 and proposed a plan which dealt with his principal asset, a...

Members