A DEBTOR MUST USE THE STRIPPED/CRAMMED DOWN AMOUNT FOR
PURPOSES OF CURRENT MONTHLY INCOME (CMI) ON LINE 47 OF B22C
In re Hoss, Case No. 08-10365
In re Arroyo, Case No. 07-12779
August 2008, Judge Nugent
In above median income (AMI) cases, debtors sought to deduct contract payments, rather than the stripped off/crammed down amounts. The Court sustained the Chapter 13 Trustee’s objection to confirmation. This is a good analysis of the status of the law, as of the date of the
issuance of the opinion. Judge Nugent applied the reasoning of Lanning, but on the
expense side, rather than the income side, of the equation. He also disagreed with Judge
Karlin’s decision in Allen, which would have reached an opposite result.
Related posts:
[...] Objected to confirmation on the basis that Debtor’s means test calculations erroneously included the full amount of the pre-petition car payments rather than the reduced or crammed-down amounts. In analyzing 1325(b)(1), the Court found that 707(b)(2)(A)(iii) applies and that Debtors need not only list the amounts they will actually pay through the plan. There is a split of authority on this important issue. This case was not appealed so no appellate decision is in the immediate future for the 10th Circuit. See the Hoss and Arroyo decision by Judge Nugent for the opposite result. [...]
[...] may be deviated from also. This is consistent with dicta in Lanning, and Judge Nugent in In Re Hoss, 08-10365, and In re Arroyo, No. 07-12779. It may also be inconsistent with Judge Karlin in the [...]