Search OpinionsTotal: 112
In re Mravik, 399 B.R. 202 (December 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Language of § 707(b) that a court "may" dismiss indicates discretion, and court declined to dismiss presumed abusive case where no payments would be made to creditors under a Chapter 13 plan.
In re Crawford, 397 B.R. 461 (October 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Negative equity financed as part of new vehicle loan did not qualify for purchase money security interest treatment under the "hanging paragraph" of section 1325(a). The court adopted the "dual purpose" rule, allowing only the portion of the secured claim in the new car to qualify for hanging paragraph treatment.
In re Stascak, No. 08-24392 (October 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Where 401(k) loan will be paid in full before end of Chapter 13 plan, payments on loan must be pro-rated over the life of the plan in order to comply with § 1322(f)
In re Schley, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 2214 (August 2008) -- Judge Kelley
"Special circumstances" did not exist where debtor worked as an occupational therapist for a school system, only receiving income during 9 months of the year.
In re Cruz, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 2540 (August 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Entire bonus received in 6-month prefiling period was included in current monthly income.
In re Luedtke, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 2118 (July 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Secured creditor's affirmative credit reporting of original debt rather than debt as modified by debtor's confirmed Chapter 13 plan was a violation of § 1327.
In re Price, No. 08-24090 (June 2008) -- Judge Kelley
Utility deposit for above-poverty guideline Chapter 7 debtor was reduced based on debtor's motion under § 366(b).
In re Cannon, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 1870 (June 2008) -- Judge Kelley
No § 366 utility deposit required when Chapter 7 debtor's income was below poverty guidelines, and deposit could not be required under applicable Public Service Regulations.
Sensient Tech. Corp. v. Baiocchi (In re Baiocchi), 389 B.R. 828 (June 2008) -- Judge Kelley
A for-profit corporation's employee tuition reimbursement program constituted an educational benefit under § 523(a)(8). The Court held that the Debtor's obligation to repay the debt was therefore nondischargeable in her Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
In re Ford, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 1381 (April 2008) -- Judge Kelley
A vehicle that was not purchased for the personal use of the Debtor did not qualify for 910-treatment under the first portion of the hanging paragraph. Since the lender had a purchase money security interest in the vehicle and not "any other thing of value" the second portion of the hanging paragraph also did not apply. The Court questioned the good faith of the debtor in proposing to cram down on a brand new vehicle that the debtor did not use.