Seventh Circuit: John H. Germeraad v. Myrick J. Powers
Bankruptcy, FRCP, Mootness
A denial of a trustee's motion to modify is analogous to a 12(b)6 dismissal, and is therefore sufficiently final for appeal when not attributable to a technical defect.
Just as 60(b) motion might be filed again with a different theory, the fact that the trustee might file several motions does not affect their finality for purposes of review.
As the proposed change would relate back to the filing date of the motion, the expiration of the plan's timeframe doesn't make the controversy moot. The fact that denial of discharge is an equitable decision does not affect mootness.
So long as the motion to modify the plan is filed during the pendency of the plan, it is timely.
Although nothing in the Code authorizes a postconfirmation modification to account for increased income, the decision is an equitable one suggested by the purposes of the Code, and is not subjet to any "good faith" requirement.
John H. Germeraad v. Myrick J. Powers