Sunahara v. Burchard (In Re Sunahara)
United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SMITH, Bankruptcy Judge.
At issue in this appeal is whether a debtor may modify a confirmed 36-month chapter 132 plan so as to pay it off in a single lump sum and receive an early discharge. The bankruptcy court held that debtor, Frayne Sunahara, was not so entitled. We REVERSE and REMAND.
FACTS
Debtor commenced his chapter 13 case on September 26, 2003. The San Francisco and Oakland divisions of the Northern District of California have adopted a mandatory model chapter 13 plan. The model plan includes a provision providing that “[ujnless all allowed claims are paid in full, this Plan…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Lamie v. United States TrusteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- United States v. GrandersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Forbes v. Forbes (In Re Forbes)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
- In Re Moses Hill, Debtor. Phelix Jones, Creditors v. Moses Hill, DebtorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Garner v. Shier (In Re Garner)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- In Re SlusherUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nevada · 2007
- Ransom v. MBNA America Bank, N.A. (In Re Ransom)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- United Student Funds, Inc. v. Wylie (In Re Wylie)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- In Re SwanUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · 2007
- John H. Germeraad v. Myrick J. PowersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.