Legal Opinion

Dehart v. Stonier (In Re Stonier)

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided November 2, 2009No. 5-08-bk-51215 RNOPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION 1

ROBERT N. OPEL, III, Bankruptcy Judge.

This case presents the following question. Where the Debtors’ Modified Plan provides for regular monthly mortgage payments to be made directly to the Mortgagee, may the Chapter 13 Trustee object to approval of the Modified Plan because the monthly mortgage payments are not made as “conduit payments” by the Chapter 13 Trustee? For the reasons stated below, I overrule the Chapter 13 Trustee’s Objections and will approve the Modified Plan.

I. Jurisdiction

This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and 157(a), (b)(1).…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Meza v. Truman (In Re Meza)Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
  2. Perez v. PeakeDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2007
  3. In Re ForteUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2005
  4. Dehart v. Lopatka (In Re Lopatka)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Independent Mortgage Co. v. Porter (In Re Porter)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2007

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. DeHart v. Eckert (In re Eckert)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Caruso v. Dehart (In Re Caruso)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
  3. Robert P. Conrad, Jr. and Lisa Lanocha ConradUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
  4. Robert P. Conrad, Jr. and Lisa Lanocha ConradUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API