- Case Type:
- Case Status:
- BAP No. CC-19-1011-TaSKu; Bk. No. 8:18-bk-13376-ES (9th Circuit, Jul 31,2019) Not Published
- Bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing debtor's chapter 13 case after denying confirmation of her plan.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California; reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Debtor filed a chapter 13 case. Debtor's first proposed plan provided no treatment for any secured creditor. Wells Fargo filed a proof of claim asserting that it was a secured creditor in Debtor's bankruptcy. Debtor filed an amended plan that specified neither the amount of plan payments nor the plan's term. The Trustee objected and sought either dismissal or conversion to chapter 7 because Debtor had not made any plan payments. Wells Fargo objected to the plan, arguing that Debtor could not modify its lien on her property. Bankruptcy judge dismissed the case because the plan proposed no payments, and Debtor was not prepared to make payments to Wells Fargo. The BAP affirmed the bankruptcy court's dismissal, because (1) Debtor had not made any payments as contemplated in her initial plan; (2) the plan was not confirmable in several respects; (3) Debtor was not prepared to propose a Code-compliant chapter 13 plan; and (4) Debtor had asked for additional time to file a plan, and the bankruptcy judge had denied that request.
- Taylor, Spraker, Kurtz
Jenny Smith v. Haynes & Haynes P.C.
Summarizing by Kathleen DiSanto
2981 in the system
3 Being Processed