Minnesota Bankruptcy Case: Trustee’s Attempt to Modify Plan to Increase Commitment Period from 30 to 60 Months Rebuffed
The following is a summary of a Minnesota bankruptcy case or a case relevant to Minnesota bankruptcy law.
Minnesota Bankruptcy Case:
In re Bailey, 425 B.R. 825 (Bankr. D. Minn. 3/10/10) (O’Brien, J.).
Trustee’s Attempt to Modify Plan to Increase Commitment Period from 30 to 60 Months Rebuffed
The court denied the chapter 13 trustee’s motion to confirm a modified plan. The above-median income debtors initially confirmed a 60-month chapter 13 plan. They later confirmed a modified plan reducing the payment period to 36 months. Several months after the modified plan was confirmed, the chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to increase the debtors’ plan from 36 months to 60 months. Whether or not above-median income chapter 13 debtors are permitted to confirm plan modifications of less than 60 months, the court held that the confirmed modified plan was subject to the doctrine of res judicata. Because the trustee’s modified plan was not based on any unforeseen changes to the debtor’s ability to pay and because the modified plan was duly noticed and confirmed without objected, the trustee’s modification was an impermissible collateral attack.
Credit: The preceding was a summary of a case relevant to Minnesota bankruptcy law. The case summary was prepared by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court through Judge Robert J. Kressel & attorney Faye Knowles.