Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re: David C. Welsh and Sharon N. Welsh
United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 17, 2012No. BAP MT-10-1465-PePaH; Bankruptcy 10-61285Published
1Dissent
PAPPAS, Bankruptcy Judge,
Dissenting.
I dissent because, in my opinion, the bankruptcy court abused its discretion when it confirmed Debtors’ chapter 13 plan because it applied incorrect legal rules in determining that the plan had been proposed in good faith as required by § 1325(a)(3).10
The bankruptcy court concluded in this case that, in performing a good faith analysis, it was precluded from considering that David Welsh receives $1,165 per month in Social Security retirement benefits.11 The bankruptcy court also decided that, because Debtors were current on their monthly payments to secured…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. EspinosaSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- In Re Jonathan Barnes Leavitt, Debtor. Jonathan Barnes Leavitt v. Carlos SotoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- In Re Julian Roosevelt Goeb and Jane Alma Goeb, Debtors. In Re Julian Roosevelt Goeb and Jane Alma Goeb v. Harry W. Heid, Chapter 13 TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Bankr. L. Rep. P 75,652 in Re William Eisen, Debtor. William Eisen v. Nancy Curry, Trustee, Chapter 13 TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Warren (In Re Warren)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.