Debtor sought a fifth extension to file a subchapter V plan. Under § 1189(b), an extension to file a subchapter V plan may only be granted if the need for the extension is due to “circumstances for which the debtor should not justly be held accountable.” The caselaw is split on whether the standard is an equitable inquiry or limited to whether the circumstances were “beyond the debtor’s control.” The Court applied the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court in Pioneer, which resolved a similar split in the context of “excusable neglect” in favor of an equitable inquiry, based on bankruptcy courts having broad equitable powers to balance the interests of the affected parties while guided by the overriding goal of ensuring the success of the reorganization. The Court determined that an equitable inquiry is the appropriate standard under § 1189(b) as well. The equitable inquiry should consider whether the need for the extension was within debtor’s reasonable control and may also include such things as potential prejudice to the parties, the length of the extension, the debtor’s good faith, the debtor’s progress in formulating a meaningful plan, and the views of creditors and the subchapter V trustee. After making an equitable inquiry in this case, where among other things, Debtor is participating in a mediation with major creditors, the Court concluded that circumstances existed for which Debtor should not justly be held accountable and granted the extension. 

The Court disallowed a portion of the fees requested in chapter 13 debtor’s counsel’s first fee application, and approved counsel’s second fee application. Even though Court previously approved compensation requested in counsel’s first fee application, the Court may reexamine interlocutory interim fee applications at any time prior to final approval. Counsel’s request for compensation for work to correct counsel’s own mistakes was unreasonable and non-compensable under 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(4)(B) notwithstanding benefit to the debtors. Charging to correct counsel’s own mistakes can subject counsel to sanctions.

Counsel for chapter 13 debtors filed a second fee application, about two years after confirmation of debtors plan. Due to the size of the fee application, the court carefully reviewed it and allowed fees of $5,355 rather than the amount requested, i.e., $8,840.

After substantial consummation of creditors’ chapter 11 plan, debtor filed multiple motions seeking various forms of relief and discovery, none of which had merit. As the case was ready for entry of a final decree, the court addressed each motion and denied all relief.