Legal Opinion
In Re Henderson
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho
Decided April 18, 2011No. 10-03114PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
JIM D. PAPPAS, Bankruptcy Judge.
Introduction
David and Candice Henderson (“Debtors”) are above-median-income chapter 13 1 debtors who, because their Form 22C 2 shows they have negative “projected disposable income,” propose a three-year debt repayment plan. Dkt. Nos. 9, 30, 40. While Debtors’ plan calls for monthly payments of $1,140, all of that amount is required to service secured debt and administrative expenses; the plan will pay nothing to Debtors’ unsecured creditors. See Dkt. No. 40.
Chapter 13 trustee, Kathleen McCallis-ter (“Trustee”), objected to confirmation of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Hamilton v. LanningSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Maney v. KagenveamaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Baud v. CarrollCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Danielson v. Flores (In Re Flores)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- In Re ReedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · 2011
- In re BallewUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2013
- Danielson v. Flores (In Re Flores)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012