Plan Confirmation

District court equates distribution to creditors in chapter 13 to substantial consummation of a chapter 11 plan.

In the Third Circuit, it’s possible to cure a payment default under a chapter 13 play beyond five years, district judge says in affirming the bankruptcy court.

The Ninth Circuit split with the Sixth Circuit in the interpretation of the ‘hanging paragraph’ in Section 541(b)(7). Courts are divided four ways on whether or how much a ‘13’ debtor may contribute to voluntary retirement plans after filing.

Benchnotes By Bradley D. Pack, Aaron M. Kaufman and Christina Sanfelippo 1 Constitutional Challenge to Chapter 13 Trustee Compensation Scheme Rejected The salaries of chapter 13 trustees are paid by the trustees’ collection of a percentage fee from every plan payment

Despite Section 1325(a)(5)(B), an auto lender was entitled to retain a lien when there were co-debtors.

The expiration of Section 1329(d) in March 2022 means that 84-month chapter 13 plans amended now must revert to 60-month plans.

Benchnotes By Christina Sanfelippo, Aaron M. Kaufman and Bradley D. Pack 1 Delaware Bankruptcy Court Authorizes “Opt-Out” Nondebtor Third-Party Releases Hon. Craig Goldblatt of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware recently considered the standards for

Small state exemptions mean that some low-income debtors can lose their homes in chapters 7 and 13 if there is equity.

When chapter 13 cases are converted to chapter 7 before confirmation, bankruptcy courts are split on whether the broad language in Harris v. Viegelahn bars chapter 13 trustees from paying administrative expenses incurred before conversion.

In In re Smith, [1] the Third Circuit reminded consumer bankruptcy practitioners of the wrath of res judicata. The debtor owned an encumbered rental property with an assignment of rents to her mortgage lender. The debtor’s proposed chapter 13 plan included a cramdown of the mortgage lender’s claim that reduced the secured portion of the claim from $150,000 to $95,000 — the value of the collateral. The plan further provided that the payment of rents would pay down the secured portion of the lender’s claim.

The lender objected to the $95,000 cramdown value, the application of rents to the secured portion of its claim, and feasibility. After the bankruptcy court sided with the debtor and held that the rents could pay down the secured portion of the lender’s claim, the lender agreed to the $95,000 cramdown value and abandoned its feasibility objections. The bankruptcy court confirmed the plan.