Wells Fargo Financial Georgia, Inc. v. Baxter (In Re Williams)

385 B.R. 468, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 985, 2008 WL 872277
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia
DecidedMarch 28, 2008
Docket17-50758
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 385 B.R. 468 (Wells Fargo Financial Georgia, Inc. v. Baxter (In Re Williams)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wells Fargo Financial Georgia, Inc. v. Baxter (In Re Williams), 385 B.R. 468, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 985, 2008 WL 872277 (Ga. 2008).

Opinion

ORDER

SUSAN D. BARRETT, Bankruptcy Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on two motions. The first is a “Motion for Relief from Stay or in the Alternative Adequate Protection Payments” filed by Wells Fargo Financial Georgia, Inc. (“Wells Fargo”) seeking alternatively, relief from the automatic stay, adequate protection payments with a superpriority, or equal monthly payments. In addition, Debtor’s attorney has filed a “Motion by Attorney for Debtor for Order to Compel Payments by Chapter 13 Trustee Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1),” seeking payment of $1,529.22 in outstanding attorney’s fees and requesting, if necessary, the Trustee recover the sums previously paid to the Office of Child Support Services. These are core proceedings within the meaning of *470 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(b)(2)(A) and (G). For the reasons discussed below, Debtor’s attorney’s Motion to Direct Payments is granted in part and Wells Fargo’s Motion for Relief is denied as moot.

FINDINGS OF FACT

• Debtor filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy relief on February 16, 2007.
• Debtor owns a 1998 Ford Mustang GT convertible (“Vehicle”) and his bankruptcy schedules list Wells Fargo as a secured creditor holding a purchase money security interest in the Vehicle.
• Debtor is single with two children ages 13 and 9, for whom he pays child support. 1
• The Office of Child Support filed a proof of claim asserting a priority claim in the amount of $1,529.22 for past due child support.
• Under the terms of Debtor’s confirmed bankruptcy plan, Debtor is to make plan payments in the amount of $544.00/month for at least three years.
• The plan provides for payment of the Trustee’s commission and $2,500.00 in attorney fees for Debtor’s counsel pursuant to § 507(a)(2).
• Other § 507 claims are to be paid in full over the life of the plan as funds become available.
• The plan estimates Wells Fargo’s claim at $13,176.00 with 8.25% interest; however, the plan leaves the exact payment amount to the discretion of the Trustee.
• Wells Fargo filed a secured claim in the amount of $13,718.01.
• The plan provides for Wells Fargo to receive pre-confirmation adequate protection payments of $50.00/month. The Trustee timely paid the only pre-con-firmation adequate protection payment that came due in this case.
• The only other secured creditor is the Georgia Department of Revenue, who filed a proof of claim in the amount of $3,844.09.
• Wells Fargo did not object to confirmation of Debtor’s plan and an order confirming the plan was entered on April 9, 2007. 2
• Post-confirmation, the Trustee began disbursing funds to: the Office of Child Support for its arrearage claim; the Court for filing fees; and the Trustee for his commission.
• Initially, these payments were made to the exclusion of all other payments, including those to Debtor’s attorney’s fees, and secured creditors, such as Wells Fargo.
• Disbursements to Debtor’s attorney started in July of 2007, but Wells Fargo did not receive its first post-confirmation disbursement until January 2008, almost one year after the bankruptcy petition was filed.
• On August 21, 2007, Wells Fargo filed its motion for relief from the automatic stay.
• Two days later, Debtor’s attorney filed a motion to compel payments seeking $1,529.22 in attorney’s fees and requesting, if necessary, an order re *471 quiring the Trustee to recover sums previously paid to the Office of Child Support Services.
• At the hearing, Wells Fargo stated it had no real interest in obtaining possession of the Vehicle, and acknowledged it had not objected to confirmation of Debtor’s proposed plan.
• In its post-hearing brief, Wells Fargo states it “is amenable to receiving the pre-confirmation payment of $50.00 for the intervening months since confirmation. However, going forward ... [Wells Fargo] is entitled to receive a minimum of $132.00 a month, which is the average interest payment until attorney’s fees are paid.” (Wells Fargo Br. at 7, Dckt. No. 43.)
• Under this analysis, Wells Fargo would be satisfied if it received at least $978.00 3 as of March 2008.
• As of March 4, 2008, the Trustee has made the following disbursements in this case: 4

Wells Fargo

Pre-confirmation adequate protection $ 50.00

Monthly disbursements $ 468.07

Interest $1,032.76

Total to Wells Fargo: $1,550.83

Georgia Dept, of Rev.

Monthly disbursements $ 41.58

Interest $ 87.92

Office of Child Support $1,529.22

Debtor’s counsel $2,500.00

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The issues before the Court involve the proper order of distribution in chapter 18 cases. Pursuant to § 1322(a)(2), 5 a plan must provide for full payment of all § 507 priority claims. 11 U.S.C. § 1322(a)(2). Under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”), domestic support obligations moved from seventh to first priority. 11 U.S.C. § 507(a). 6 BAPCPA added several other sections to the Bankruptcy Code to ensure collection of domestic support obligations in chapter 13 cases. 7 However, under § 507(a)(1)(C), domestic support obligations are subject to certain trustee ad *472 ministrative expenses. 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(1)(C); In re Reid, 2006 WL 2077572, at *2 (Bankr.M.D.N.C.2006). Furthermore, § 1326(b)(1) 8 establishes the distribution scheme for chapter 13 cases and it provides that the Trustee is to pay § 507(a)(2) 9

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

Related

In re Miceli
587 B.R. 492 (N.D. Illinois, 2018)
In re Williams
583 B.R. 453 (N.D. Illinois, 2018)
In re Cochran
555 B.R. 892 (M.D. Georgia, 2016)
In re Chamberlain
555 B.R. 14 (D. Colorado, 2016)
In Re Kirk
465 B.R. 300 (N.D. Alabama, 2012)
In Re Willis
460 B.R. 784 (D. Kansas, 2011)
In Re Butcher
459 B.R. 115 (D. Colorado, 2011)
In Re Butler
403 B.R. 5 (W.D. Arkansas, 2009)
In Re Marks
394 B.R. 198 (N.D. Illinois, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
385 B.R. 468, 2008 Bankr. LEXIS 985, 2008 WL 872277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-fargo-financial-georgia-inc-v-baxter-in-re-williams-gasb-2008.