Interesting bit of Case Law for those debating an Over-Median Ch.7

[alorth]

In re Mravik, 399 B.R. 202 (Bankr. E.D. Wisc. 2008). UST moved to dismiss case under Section707(b)(2) and (b)(3)(B). The bankruptcy court denied the UST’s motion. In ruling, the court found that notwithstanding that the presumption of abuse arose, and that the debtor failed to rebut the presumption, Section 707(b)(1) provided the court with discretion to dismiss a case, convert a case, or simply do nothing. In this particular case, the court held that the case should not be dismissed because there was “no suggestion that expenses claimed on the [d]ebtor's Form 22A[were] unreasonable” or “that she ha[d] manipulated her income or expenses to qualify for a[c]hapter 7 discharge.” Further, the court found that because a hypothetical plan under chapter 13would lead to no repayment to creditors, the case should not be converted. Accordingly, the court denied the motion and did nothing.


(I'm no attorney, so this isn't to be considered legal advice. Just a guy going through BK who found something useful on the internet that I though I might share)

[moe]

That is interesting. I looked at other cases that went another way but there was always some reason, such as the person getting a job some time before their filing was complete, etc.