The Chapter 7 trustee was immune from suit for selling the debtor's personal property pursuant to court order. The dispute between the debtor's landlord and the secured creditor over the distribution of the sale proceeds could proceed in state court.

Court denied motion to appoint a Chapter 11 trustee or to dismiss case. The mismanagement occurred when debtors' son was in charge of operations. Steps have been taken to rectify that situation, and cause no longer exists for appointment or dismissal.

Because the debtors had no equity in property they proposed to sell, and it wasn't necessary for an effective reorganization, and its sale would not benefit the estate, the court denied the motion to sell and granted lienholders relief to foreclose.

Creditors and debtors objected to counsel's fee application, saying much of the work done was not of benefit to the estate. The Court agreed that there were areas of concern about the work as well as the source of the retainer and reduced the final award.

Reported at 435 B.R. 615. Debtor, as court-appointed conservator, acted in a fiduciary capacity. Her failure to account for use of the protected person's property was a defalcation of that duty, excepting the debt from discharge under § 523(a)(4).

Neighbors who hired a contractor to repair a retaining wall on debtor's property did not have standing to claim a statutory construction lien because they didn't actually furnish any services or materials. They may have a claim for reimbursement.

The court sustained the IRS's objection to debtor's motion for discharge, finding the plan language about payments to unsecured creditors internally inconsistent but interpreting it to require specific payments regardless of disposable income.

A state-court personal injury action against two debtors & a non-debtor party can go forward against the debtors because all parties are necessary for a determination of liability. A judgment would be uncollectible unless excepted from discharge.

The court refused to approve a sale of the debtors' real and personal property when it found that the debtors' objection to the claim of a lienholder in the property had been mistakenly granted. The claim and the value of the lien needed to be determined.

The court denied without prejudice a lender's motion for relief. The debtors offered adequate protection and filed a plan, disclosure statement, and exhibits which appeared to rebut the bank's assertion that a confirmable plan was not feasible.