In Re Stark

8 B.R. 233, 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 5073, 7 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 229
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio
DecidedJanuary 22, 1981
Docket19-60159
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 8 B.R. 233 (In Re Stark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Stark, 8 B.R. 233, 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 5073, 7 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 229 (Ohio 1981).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

WALTER J. KRASNIEWSKI, Bankruptcy Judge.

This matter came on to be heard upon the application to abandon personal property filed by International Harvester Credit Corp. and upon the subsequent memoranda filed in support and opposition thereto.

Upon consideration thereof, the Court finds that the application of International Harvester Credit Corp. cannot be granted. Under 11 U.S.C. Section 554, the Court, upon request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, may order the trustee to abandon property of the estate that is either burdensome or of inconsequential value to the estate. The application of International Harvester Credit Corp. was filed after the confirmation of the Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan. 11 U.S.C. Section 1327(b) provides:

“Except as otherwise provided in the plan or the order confirming the plan, the confirmation of a plan vests all of the property of the estate in the debtor.”

Because the Debtors' plan did not provide otherwise, all the property of the estate vested, upon confirmation, in the Debtors. Consequently no estate, as is provided for in 11 U.S.C. Section 1306 and Section 541, is in existence. With no existing estate Section 554 becomes inapplicable and the application of International Harvester Credit Corp. should be dismissed. Good cause appearing it is therefore,

ORDERED that the application to abandon of International Harvester Credit Corp. filed on December 19, 1980, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

Related

In Re Van Stelle
354 B.R. 157 (W.D. Michigan, 2006)
In Re Fisher
198 B.R. 721 (N.D. Illinois, 1996)
In Re Leavell
190 B.R. 536 (E.D. Virginia, 1995)
Lombardo v. Gerard
592 N.E.2d 1333 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1992)
Price v. United States (In Re Price)
130 B.R. 259 (N.D. Illinois, 1991)
In Re Petruccelli
113 B.R. 5 (S.D. California, 1990)
Matter of Tworek
107 B.R. 666 (D. Nebraska, 1989)
Matter of Rutt
98 B.R. 490 (D. Nebraska, 1988)
In Re Redick
81 B.R. 881 (E.D. Michigan, 1987)
In Re Martin
73 B.R. 721 (C.D. California, 1987)
Riddle v. Aneiro (In Re Aneiro)
72 B.R. 424 (S.D. California, 1987)
In Re Root
61 B.R. 984 (D. Colorado, 1986)
In Re Dickey
64 B.R. 3 (E.D. Virginia, 1985)
Mason v. Williams (In Re Mason)
45 B.R. 498 (D. Oregon, 1984)
Weymouth v. York (In Re York)
13 B.R. 757 (D. Maine, 1981)
In Re Adams
12 B.R. 540 (D. Utah, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 B.R. 233, 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 5073, 7 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-stark-ohnb-1981.