United States Fourth Circuit

District court's ruling, that a Chapter 13 debtor's proposed plan was an impermissible modification of a debt that she and her husband owed to a bank, is vacated because debtor's proposed plan does not constitute an impermissible modification under the no-modification concepts contained in 11 U.S.C. section 1322.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/27/2003
• Published 05/27/2003

Judges

• Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Robert Tayloe Copeland, Copeland & Bieger, P.C., Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellant.  Andrew Major Hanson, Penn, Stuart & Eskridge, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Mark L. Esposito, Penn, Stuart & Eskridge, Bristol, Virginia, for Appellees.