In re Enabnit

Good Law
2013 WL 309909·2013 Bankr. LEXIS 561·490 B.R. 404
United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 17, 2013No. 12-54955California2,764 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Johnson, J.

*406 ORDER SUSTAINING OBJECTION BY AMERICAN EXPRESS TO SECOND AMENDED CHAPTER 13 PLAN

Creditor American Express Centurion Bank and American Express Bank, FSB (“American Express”) objected to confirmation of Debtors’ plan on the grounds of failure to comply with the disposable income test of 11 U.S.C. § 1325 (b)(1)(B) and lack of good faith pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1325 (a)(3) based on Debtors’ expenses on a timeshare ownership.

The court heard argument on the objection on November 15, 2012. Patrick Calhoun appeared for Debtors and Cheryl Rouse appeared for American Express. For the reasons noted below, the court will sustain American Express’s objection to confirmation, without prejudice to the filing of a revised chapter 13 plan and the submission of appropriate evidence to support that plan.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Steven Enabnit and Carol Enabnit (“Debtors”) commenced this case by filing a voluntary petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code on June 29, 2012. In Schedule B, under the category “other personal property,” Debtors listed a timeshare lease with a value of $30,000. In Schedule G, Debtors identified the lessor as Diamond Resorts, located in Las Vegas, Nevada,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.