Legal Opinion
In re Hinkle
United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 2, 2012No. 5-11-bk-00537 RNOPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION1
ROBERT N. OPEL, II, Bankruptcy Judge.
This Chapter 13 case presents the following question. Can a debtor’s plan providing for modified payment of an overse-cured claim beyond the loan maturity date be confirmed, over the objection of the creditor? I find that it cannot and will, therefore, sustain the objection to the plan.
I. Jurisdiction
This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and § 157(b)(2). This is a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(L).
II. Procedural History
Myles L. Hinkle (“Debtor”) filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition on January 27,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Dewsnup v. TimmSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- In Re HammondCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- In Re Harmony Holdings, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · 2008
- Steinman v. Spencer (In Re Argus Group 1700, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
- In Re DavisUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bullard v. Hyde Park Savings BankBankruptcy Appellate Panel of the First Circuit · 2013