.jpg)
Section 1328(a)
This is a response from Jim King,
Interesting, I've
filed about 4 or 5 motions for a discharge in 13s before the T'ee
has done her thing. They don't like it but don't oppose it.
Jim
wrote:
> Hi Dennis, Many thanks for your suggestion. I hadn't thought about
using an out-of district case outside. A technical question:
wouldn't an attorney fee application have to be heard before the
discharge is granted (if I were owed unpaid fees and wanted to be
paid)? Again, thank you, CF
> ----- Original Message -----
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 1:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
>
>
> Hello:
>
> There is an interesting case on the subject, outside of our
district, In re Celeste, 310 B.R. 286 (Bkrtcy.D.Md 2004) . The date
of the opinion is June 1, 2004. The case granted a "Motion for an
Order Expediting Discharge." The court granted the motion on the
basis the plan payments had all been made and 1328a states the court
SHALL issue a discharge after all of the plan payments are made.
>
> I suggest you file a motion and cite Celeste. You may get
something started in this district from which all of our 13 clients
will benefit.
>
>
>
> dennis
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hi Dennis, Many thanks for your suggestion. I hadn't thought about using an out-of district case outside. A technical question: wouldn't an attorney fee application have to be heard before the discharge is granted (if I were owed unpaid fees and wanted to be paid)? Again, thank you, CF
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Hello:
There is an interesting case on the subject, outside of our district, In re Celeste, 310 B.R. 286 (Bkrtcy.D.Md 2004) . The date of the opinion is June 1, 2004. The case granted a "Motion for an Order Expediting Discharge." The court granted the motion on the basis the plan payments had all been made and 1328a states the court SHALL issue a discharge after all of the plan payments are made.
I suggest you file a motion and cite Celeste. You may get something started in this district from which all of our 13 clients will benefit.
dennis
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Hi Dennis, Many thanks for your suggestion. I
hadn't thought about using an out-of district case outside. A
technical question: wouldn't an attorney fee application have to be heard before
the discharge is granted (if I were owed unpaid fees and wanted to be paid)?
Again, thank you, CF
----- Original Message -----
From:
cdcbaa
Board
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section
1328(a)
Hello:
There is an interesting case on the subject, outside of our district,
In re Celeste, 310 B.R. 286 (Bkrtcy.D.Md 2004) . The date
of the opinion is June 1, 2004. The case granted a "Motion for an Order Expediting Discharge." The court granted the motion on the basis
the plan payments had all been made and 1328a states the court SHALL issue a
discharge after all of the plan payments are made.
I suggest you file a motion and cite Celeste. You may get something
started in this district from which all of our 13 clients will benefit.
dennis
Do you Yahoo!?Vote for the
stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hello:
There is an interesting case on the subject, outside of our district, In re Celeste, 310 B.R. 286 (Bkrtcy.D.Md 2004) . The date of the opinion is June 1, 2004. The case granted a "Motion for an Order Expediting Discharge." The court granted the motion on the basis the plan payments had all been made and 1328a states the court SHALL issue a discharge after all of the plan payments are made.
I suggest you file a motion and cite Celeste. You may get something started in this district from which all of our 13 clients will benefit.
dennis
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
Hello:
There is an interesting case on the subject, outside of our district, In re Celeste, 310 B.R. 286 (Bkrtcy.D.Md 2004) . The date of the opinion is June 1, 2004. The case granted a "Motion for an Order Expediting Discharge." The court granted the motion on the basis the plan payments had all been made and 1328a states the court SHALL issue a discharge after all of the plan payments are made.
I suggest you file a motion and cite Celeste. You may get something started in this district from which all of our 13 clients will benefit.
dennis
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Thanks Melissa. Your comments are in line with my thoughts as well. I'd be glad to read Riviera. Thank you , Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Hi Carolyn,
I had been looking at these cases lately in connection with when a plan is actually completed. I.e., number of payments and/or percentage. As far as when the debtor is entitled to a discharge, according to the Code, the Court "shall" grant the discharge as soon as payments are completed. However, the trustee must issue an "Intent to File Final Report" and then the Final Report after that. Presumably this is to give anyone a chance to object to discharge or to dispute that their claim was paid. As far as I know, the debtor cannot dispose of property of the estate in this district until the discharge is actually granted. So, even when the plan is actually completed and the debtor is entitled to a discharge pursuant to the Code, she would still need to get permission from the court to sell/refi, etc.
Some time back Judge Mund was talking about instituting an "expedited" discharge procedure, but I have not heard anything about a new procedure.
I don't have the Rivera cite with me, so I will email later. It was a Central District case written by Riblet. However, I don't think it will help you with the discharge issue as it had to do with completion of the plan.
Melissa
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with when the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the case with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the debtor can ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare circumstances. In Moss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor start acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or refinance without court permission and move to another state. Thank you, Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa Besecker
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
,
I
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Thanks Melissa. Your comments are in line with my
thoughts as well. I'd be glad to read Riviera. Thank you , Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
From:
Melissa Besecker
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:34
PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section
1328(a)
Hi Carolyn,
I had been looking at these cases lately in connection with when a plan
is actually completed. I.e., number of payments and/or percentage. As
far as when the debtor is entitled to a discharge, according to the Code, the
Court "shall" grant the discharge as soon as payments are completed.
However, the trustee must issue an "Intent to File Final Report" and then the
Final Report after that. Presumably this is to give anyone a chance to
object to discharge or to dispute that their claim was paid. As far as I
know, the debtor cannot dispose of property of the estate in this district
until the discharge is actually granted. So, even when the plan is actually completed and the debtor is entitled to a discharge pursuant to the
Code, she would still need to get permission from the court to sell/refi, etc.
Some time back Judge Mund was talking about instituting an "expedited"
discharge procedure, but I have not heard anything about a new
procedure.
I don't have the Rivera cite with me, so I will email later. It was
a Central District case written by Riblet. However, I don't think it
will help you with the discharge issue as it had to do with completion of the
plan.
MelissaCarolyn Fergoda
<cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with
when the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the
paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the
case with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the
debtor can ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare
circumstances. In Moss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do
you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor
start acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or
refinance without court permission and move
to another state. Thank you, Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
From:
Melissa
Besecker
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29
PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of
"completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two
cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding
that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors
who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was
that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm
remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of
payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase
Percentage?
Melissa BeseckerCarolyn Fergoda
<cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328
(a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear
to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of
Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I
found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at
the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area?
Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hi Carolyn,
I had been looking at these cases lately in connection with when a plan is actually completed. I.e., number of payments and/or percentage. As far as when the debtor is entitled to a discharge, according to the Code, the Court "shall" grant the discharge as soon as payments are completed. However, the trustee must issue an "Intent to File Final Report" and then the Final Report after that. Presumably this is to give anyone a chance to object to discharge or to dispute that their claim was paid. As far as I know, the debtor cannot dispose of property of the estate in this district until the discharge is actually granted. So, even when the plan is actually completed and the debtor is entitled to a discharge pursuant to the Code, she would still need to get permission from the court to sell/refi, etc.
Some time back Judge Mund was talking about instituting an "expedited" discharge procedure, but I have not heard anything about a new procedure.
I don't have the Rivera cite with me, so I will email later. It was a Central District case written by Riblet. However, I don't think it will help you with the discharge issue as it had to do with completion of the plan.
Melissa
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with when the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the case with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the debtor can ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare circumstances. In Moss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor start acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or refinance without court permission and move to another state. Thank you, Carolyn
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa Besecker
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
,
I
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
Hi Carolyn,
I had been looking at these cases lately in connection with when a plan is actually completed. I.e., number of payments and/or percentage. As far as when the debtor is entitled to a discharge, according to the Code, the Court "shall" grant the discharge as soon as payments are completed. However, the trustee must issue an "Intent to File Final Report" and then the Final Report after that. Presumably this is to give anyone a chance to object to discharge or to dispute that their claim was paid. As far as I know, the debtor cannot dispose of property of the estate in this district until the discharge is actually granted. So, even when the plan is actually completed and the debtor is entitled to a discharge pursuant to the Code, she would still need to get permission from the court to sell/refi, etc.
Some time back Judge Mund was talking about instituting an "expedited" discharge procedure, but I have not heard anything about a new procedure.
I don't have the Rivera cite with me, so I will email later. It was a Central District case written by Riblet. However, I don't think it will help you with the discharge issue as it had to do with completion of the plan.
MelissaCarolyn Fergoda <cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with when the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the case with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the debtor can ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare circumstances. In Moss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor start acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or refinance without court permission and move to another state. Thank you, Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
From: Melissa Besecker
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa BeseckerCarolyn Fergoda <cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
,
I
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with when the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the case with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the debtor can ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare circumstances. In Moss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor start acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or refinance without court permission and move to another state. Thank you, Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section 1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa Besecker
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Hi Melissa,
Thanks for your response. This has to do with when
the debtor is entitled to a discharge. In Avery, the court
says the debtor gets a discharge after all the
paperwork by the trustee is done even if it takes months (I do not have the case
with me so i am going on short term memory). The court says that the debtor can
ask for a discharge earlier but that it should be in rare circumstances. InMoss, the court says the debtor is entitled to a
discharge when the payments have been made. I
don't have a cite to the Rivera case that you cite. Do you?
The issue to me is about when can the debtor start
acting like s/he is not in Ch 13, for example, sell a residence or refinance without court permission and move to another state.
Thank you, Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
From:
Melissa Besecker
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Section
1328(a)
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion
of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The
findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not
actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under
the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been
completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa BeseckerCarolyn Fergoda
<cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a)
connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be
very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In
re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers
15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section).
Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks,
Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa Besecker
Carolyn Fergoda wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
Carolyn, assuming you are referring to the nebulous issue of "completion of payments," I don't see too much of a difference in the two cases. The findings seem to be fact-specific, with Avery finding that payments had not actually been completed because certain creditors who were to be paid under the plan were not, while in Moss the finding was that payments had been completed according to the plan (maybe I'm remembering wrong?).
Personally, I like In re Rivera regarding completion of payments.
By the way, does this have to do with a Trustee's Motion to Increase Percentage?
Melissa BeseckerCarolyn Fergoda <cmfergoda@earthlink.net> wrote:
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a) connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery) and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks, Carolyn
Hi Good folks: I have client with a 1328 (a)
connundrum.After some research, I have two cases which appear to be very
different in their views, one from the eastern division of Calif. (In re Avery)
and one from the central division (In re Moss). I found Colliers 15th revised
edition unhelpful (unless I did not look at the right section). Do any of you
guys have a recent case in this area? Many thanks,
Carolyn
The post was migrated from Yahoo.