Skehen, et al v. Soos, No. 10-2007 (10th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 27, 2011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court In the Matter of: MATTHEW SCOTT SOOS, Debtor. No. 10-2007 (BAP No. 09-035-NM) -----------------------------KELLEY L. SKEHEN, Trustee, Appellant, v. MATTHEW SCOTT SOOS, Appellee. -----------------------------UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Amicus Curiae. ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HOLLOWAY, ANDERSON, and TACHA Circuit Judges. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. In this appeal, the Chapter 13 Trustee challenges a final Confirmation Order in a Chapter 13 Plan entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico. The Amended Order Confirming First Amended Chapter 13 Plan was entered on June 15, 2009, and incorporates by reference the reasoning set forth in the Order on Confirmation of Debtor s Chapter 13 Plan entered on May 6, 2009. The Trustee appealed to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP), raising an issue of first impression in this Circuit. The BAP then certified the bankruptcy order as appropriate for direct appeal to this court, see 28 U.S.C. ยง 158(d)(2)(A)(i) and (ii), because it involved a question of law as to which there was no controlling decision of this court or the Supreme Court, and because it raised a question of law requiring resolution of conflicting decisions. We granted the Trustee permission to appeal. We later abated the appeal pending a decision from the Supreme Court in a case raising the very same issue raised in this appeal. In January, the Supreme Court decided Ransom v. FIA Card Servs., N.A., 131 S. Ct. 716 (2011), holding that [a] debtor who does not make loan or lease payments may not take the car-ownership deduction in the means test formula under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. 131 S. Ct. at 721. In light of the holding in Ransom and its direct applicability in this appeal, the bankruptcy court s Amended Order Confirming First Amended Chapter 13 Plan (and the -2- earlier confirmation order incorporated by reference) is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court s decision. Entered for the Court Stephen H. Anderson Circuit Judge -3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
