Chuck McCune and Chuthamard McCune

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico·Decided November 12, 2021·No. 20-12326·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO In re: CHUCK MCCUNE and No. 20-12326-j7 CHUTHAMARD MCCUNE,

Debtors.

MEMORADUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DISPOSTION OF FUNDS HELD BY THE CHAPTER 13 TRSTUEE ON CASE CONVERSION TO CHAPTER 7

Before the Court is the Joint Motion for Clarification of Court’s Order Approving Fee Application, in Part, and Disallowing Portion of Requested Compensation, filed November 1, 2021 (the “Joint Motion”–Doc. 109). By the Joint Motion, the Chapter 13 Trustee and Debtors’ chapter 13 counsel, Davis Miles McGuire Gardner, PLLC (“Attorneys”) ask the Court for clarification on the disposition of funds Debtors paid to the Chapter 13 Trustee under their proposed chapter 13 plan during the pendency of the chapter 13 case that remain on hand upon conversion of this case to chapter 7 (sometimes, “Funds on Hand”). Having reviewed the Joint Motion and relevant caselaw in light of the procedural history of this bankruptcy case, the Court will authorize disbursement of the Funds on Hand to Attorneys in payment of the fees approved by the Order Approving Fee Application, in Part, and Disallowing Portion of Requested Compensation (“Fee Order”–Doc. 100) on the condition that Attorneys file with the Court either (a) a copy of an assignment executed by Debtors authorizing disbursement of the Funds on Hand to Attorneys that is included in the engagement letter the Debtors executed as part of their retention of Attorneys, or (b) a Direction to Pay or an Assignment executed by Debtors post-conversion containing the Certification described below. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Debtors filed a voluntary petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code on December 29, 2020, without counsel. See Doc. 1. Attorneys entered an appearance on behalf of Debtors on January 11, 2021. See Doc. 16. Attorneys filed an Interim Fee Application on July 16, 2021. See Doc. 75. Attorneys filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Defendants

[Debtors] (“Motion to Withdraw”) on October 4, 2021. See Doc. 93. On October 13, 2021, the Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order1 that denied the Debtors’ motion to convert their bankruptcy case to chapter 11, conditionally denied a creditor’s motion to convert the case to chapter 7, and granted the Debtors an opportunity to elect voluntary dismissal of their chapter 13 bankruptcy case under 11 U.S.C. § 1307(b).2 See Docs. 96 and 97. If the Debtors did not voluntarily elect to dismiss their bankruptcy case within ten days of the date of entry of the Order, the Order provided that the Court would convert the case to chapter 7. Doc. 97. The Fee Order, entered October 21, 2021, included the following provisions: The Chapter 13 Trustee is authorized to pay the Fees and Expenses to Attorney from estate funds, less the retainer, if applicable, and any previous, estate-fund payments.

[I]f this case is dismissed and any allowed Fees and Expenses remain unpaid at the time of dismissal, the Chapter 13 Trustee is hereby ordered to pay any funds she had on hand as of the date of dismissal to Debtors’ counsel, rather than the Debtors until such allowed Fees and Expenses have been paid. The Court finds that there is cause to modify the provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 349(b)(3) to such an extent.

1 The Order is titled Order 1) Denying Motion to Dismiss Filed by the Estate of Thomas W. Kuehn (Doc. 56); 2) Denying Debtors’ Motion to Convert from Chapter 13 to Chapter 11 (Doc. 68); 3) Conditionally Denying the Kuehn Estate’s Motion to Convert to Chapter 7 (Doc. 73); and 4) Granting Debtors an Opportunity to Elect Voluntary Dismissal Under § 1307(b). Doc. 97. 2 All future references to “Code,” “Section,” and “§” are to Title 11 of the United States Code, unless otherwise indicated. Debtors did not elect to dismiss their chapter 13 case voluntarily and the case converted to chapter 7 on October 28, 2021. See Docs.101 and 102. A chapter 13 plan was not confirmed prior to case conversion. The Court entered an order granting Attorneys’ Motion to Withdraw on the same date as the conversion date. See Doc. 103. The services of the Chapter 13 Trustee were terminated upon conversion to chapter 7. See Doc. 104 (removing Chapter 13 Trustee from the

case). Because the Fee Order did not specify what should happen to the Funds on Hand on the conversion date, Attorneys and the Chapter 13 Trustee filed the Joint Motion on November 1, 2021. See Doc. 109. DISCUSSION Debtors’ chapter 13 case converted to chapter 7 before confirmation of Debtors’ chapter 13 plan. Section 348(f)(1) provides, with an exception not applicable here, that on conversion of a chapter 13 case to chapter 7 property of the estate in the converted case does not include property acquired by the debtor post-petition. The issue before the Court is whether funds the Debtors paid to the Chapter 13 Trustee in anticipation of confirming a chapter 13 plan should be

paid to Attorneys, who have an allowed administrative claim for attorney’s fees, or refunded to Debtors. The Court first will address whether the third sentence of § 1326(a)(2) requires the Chapter 13 Trustee to pay the Funds on Hand to Attorneys. The Court will next address whether a debtor’s assignment to bankruptcy counsel of the funds held by a chapter 13 trustee upon conversion to chapter 7 provides an independent basis for payment of those funds to the debtor’s bankruptcy counsel. Consistent with Harris v. Viegelahn, the Court Will Follow its Prior Decision Holding That the Funds on Hand May Not Be Disbursed to Attorneys Under § 1326(a)

In Harris v. Viegelahn, 575 U.S. 510, 513 (2015), the Supreme Court held that, upon conversion to chapter 7, “a debtor who converts to Chapter 7 is entitled to return of any postpetition wages not yet distributed by the Chapter 13 trustee” under the terms of a confirmed chapter 13 plan. The Supreme Court reasoned that, after conversion to chapter 7, the services of the chapter 13 trustee terminate under § 348(e), and that “no Chapter 13 provision holds sway.” Id. at 519 and 520.3 In In re Beauregard, 533 B.R. 826, 832 (Bankr. D.N.M. 2015) this Court determined that under Viegelahn, funds held by a former chapter 13 trustee upon conversion of a

case to chapter 7 must be returned to the debtor and could not be distributed to pay administrative expenses such as debtor’s unpaid attorney’s fees, regardless of whether the plan was confirmed prior to conversion.4 Since Viegelahn and Beauregard, some courts have held that the former chapter 13 trustee continues to have some ongoing responsibilities following pre-confirmation conversion of a chapter 13 case to chapter 7, and that, under the third sentence of § 1326(a)(2),5 the chapter 13 trustee is required to pay administrative expenses, such as debtor’s counsel’s allowed unpaid fee, before returning the Funds on Hand to the debtor. See, e.g., In re Brandon, 537 B.R. 231, 236-37

3 Viegelahn also determined that the post-petition wages held by the chapter 13 trustee do not become property of the chapter 7 bankruptcy estate, unless the court determines that the debtor converted the case in bad faith. 575 U.S. at 517. 4 The Court notes that both Viegelahn and Beauregard are distinguishable if a chapter 13 case is dismissed instead of converted to chapter 7 and the Court is asked to direct the chapter 13 trustee to disburse monies she is holding to pay debtor’s counsel’s approved attorney’s fees. If the case is dismissed, the Court has authority “for cause” under a Code section that is not part of Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code to direct such payment in the dismissal order. Cf.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Chuck McCune and Chuthamard McCune, (N.M. 2021).

Chuck McCune and Chuthamard McCune (Chuck McCune and Chuthamard McCune) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Harris v. Viegelahn
575 U.S. 510 (Supreme Court, 2015)
In re Beauregard
533 B.R. 826 (D. New Mexico, 2015)
In re Brandon
537 B.R. 231 (D. Maryland, 2015)
In re Beaird
578 B.R. 643 (D. Kansas, 2017)