The appropriate valuation of the debtors' vehicle for purposes of Wells Fargo's proof of claim was the replacement value, which included a deduction from the fair market retail value for damage caused by ordinary wear and tear.

The court adopted the bank's valuation of the debtor's vehicle for its claim amount. The debtor's calculation included wear-and-tear that should have been part of the N.A.D.A. valuation and other damage that should have been covered by insurance.

An unsecured junior lien on debtor's residential real estate may be avoided after the debtor completes Chapter 13 plan payments. The bankruptcy court's Sanders decision, interpreting Nobelman, permits wholly unsecured liens to be stripped off.

Debtors' schedules didn't disclose their part-ownership of two houses which they believed were still in a probate estate, nor did they list a monthly annuity they forgot about. There was no evidence of fraudulent intent, so discharge was granted.

The court granted creditors' motion to appoint a Chapter 11 trustee due to mismanagement of the estate, lack of progress in reorganizing, failure to timely file reports, and lack of confidence in the debtors' ability to protect creditors' interests.

Under Iowa law, regular periodic charges related to the value of leased real property, such as taxes, maintenance, and insurance, may be included as part of the rent when determining the amount of a lessor's secured claim pursuant to § 502(b)(6).

The debtors claimed a homestead exemption in adjoining townhomes, but the court disallowed it. The second unit was a separate and distinct residence with a separate legal description. It was investment property, not part of the debtor's homestead.

The bankruptcy court had subject matter jurisdiction over a non-debtor corporate defendant because the allegations concerning commingling of assets and disregard of corporate structure could conceivably affect the debtor's bankruptcy case.

The Nebraska HHS Department's post-petition letters to the debtor were efforts to collect a debt and thus were willful violations of the automatic stay. Sovereign immunity did not protect the State from sanctions for the debtor's actual damages.

The proof of claim filed by the debtor's former spouse was for a debt that constituted an equitable division of the parties' marital property, rather than a domestic support obligation, so it was not entitled to priority treatment.