DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO FILE RETURNS MANDATORY UPON MOTION In re McCluney, Case No. 06-21175 June 2007, Judge Somers The Court sustained a motion to dismiss by the IRS for failure to file pre petition tax returns as required under the new 1308 provision. This is not an “automatic dismissal” provision, but once the motion…
Get the Fresh Start Only the Federal Bankruptcy Laws Can Give You
Tag Archive: Judge Berger
Negative Equity
NEGATIVE EQUITY ISSUE NOT RULED UPON IN 1327 CASE In re Kuhasz, Case No. 07-20282 November 2008, Judge Somers Court noted split within the district. Judge Karlin excluded negative equity from PMSI claim in In re Padgett, 389 BR 203, while Judge Nugent included it. In re Ford 387 BR 14827 but declined to rule…
Creditor Gets Deficiency Claim After Collateral Surrender
10th CIRCUIT ‘RULES’ In re Rule, Case No. 06-22145 July, 2008, Judge Berger Judge Berger followed In re Ballard 526 F. 3d 634 (10th Cir. 2008), in finding that a 910 car loan may have a deficiency balance after sale of the vehicle.
910 Car Claims Get Interest
SURRENDER IN FULL SATISFACTION OF 910 AND PAYMENT IN FULL WITH NOT INTEREST NOT ALLOWED In re McClay, Case No. 07-20106 October 2008, Judge Berger 910 vehicle case. Plan provided for payment of full debt with no interest and option to surrender in full satisfaction. This was found to be an attempt to modify prospectively…
What Is Personal Use of Vehicle for 910 Claim?
PERSONAL VS. BUSINESS USE FOR 910 CAR CLAIMS In re Lowder, Case No. 05-44802 August 2006, Judge Karlin Creditor objected to confirmation as debtor sought to avoid the 910 car loan restriction by arguing that she used the car to get to and from work and, therefore, not “personal”. Debtor contended that Toyota is entitled…
Who Gets Paid Out of Chapter 13 Pool?
WHAT GETS PAID OUT OF THE B22C POOL? In re Puetz, Case No 0620756 June 2007, Judge Berger B22C presumptively shows debtors projected disposable income, schedules I and J no longer determine plan payment for above median debtor, but, rather, demonstrate feasibility unless there are special circumstances justifying adjustments to B22C. This is not the…
My Income Is Above Median, How Long Will My Chapter 13 Plan Run?
B22C CONTROLS, OR IF DEBTOR USES I AND J, MUST HAVE A FIVE YEAR PLAN In re Beckerle, Case No.06-20572 April 2007, Judge Berger ACP is a time frame of either 3 or 5 years and not a multiplier. B22C is a starting place in determining projected disposable income to be received in the 5-year…
13 Plan Length Figured as of Bankruptcy Filing Date
ACP IS FIXED BUT PLAN PAYMENT IS NOT In re Anderson, Case No. 06-20664 April 2007, Judge Berger Applicable Commitment Period is determined as of the date of filing, but the amount of the plan payment is determined as of the effective date of the plan under 1325(b). Again, the Court noted that the trustee…
Chapter 13 Payment Amount Can Change, But Not Plan Length
APPLICABLE COMMITMENT PERIOD IS FIXED AS DATE OF FILING In re Moore, Case No. 06-20031 April 2007, Judge Berger Debtors’ circumstances changed post petition pre confirmation. Although this does not change the ACP, it can change the amount to be paid to creditors. The ACP is locked in as of the date of filing. The…
My Income Is Below Median, How Long Do I Pay My Chapter 13 Payments?
BELOW THE LINE DEBTOR MUST RUN 36 MONTHS In re Pohl, Case No. 06-41236 May 2007, Judge Karlin The Court determined that a below the line debtor’s case must “run” 36 months, unless it pays off all claims in full, citing 1325(b)(4). Below the line disposable income determined by Schedule J, since the bottom half…
-
Jill Michaux & Mark Neis
Attorneys at Law
Bankruptcy Law Office
Neis & Michaux, P.A.
825 Bank of America Tower
534 S. Kansas Ave., Ste. 825
Topeka, KS 66603-3446
T: 785-354-1471
F: 785-354-1170
Email: lawyers@neismichaux.com Website: www.neismichaux.com
Board Certified in
Consumer Bankruptcy Law
by the American Board of
Certification -
-
