Legal Opinion
Danielson v. Flores (In Re Flores)
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 31, 2012No. 11-55452PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge CHEN; Dissent by Judge GRABER.
OPINION
CHEN, District Judge:
I. INTRODUCTION
This bankruptcy appeal concerns confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan of reorganization. The debtors, Cesar and Ana Flores, proposed a three-year plan. Rod Daniel-son, the Chapter 13 Trustee (“Trustee”), objected and argued that a five-year plan was required. The relevant legal question is whether, under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b), a debtor with no “projected disposable income” may confirm a plan that is shorter in duration than the “applicable commitment period” found in § 1325(b).
*1023Current Ninth Circuit precedent…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Hamilton v. LanningSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- 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
- Avagyan v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- In Re AlexanderUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2006
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Doug Lair v. Steve BullockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Ana Flores v. Rod DanielsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Joe Pliler v. Richard StearnsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014
- Retail Digital Network v. Jacob AppelsmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Hatter v. DyerDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2015
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.