Martha G. Bronitsky, Chapter 13 Trustee v. Jorden Marie Saldana

This case presents a clear, recognized, and intractable conflict regarding an important statutory question under the Bankruptcy Code. According to a split panel of the Ninth Circuit, Chapter 13 debtors can voluntarily choose to fund their own retirement accounts rather than cover their unpaid debt— even if debtors never contributed pre-bankruptcy and even if their future contributions leave unsecured creditors with nothing (a 0.00% recovery) over a five-year bankruptcy plan. This issue has left the courts in complete disarray: it has split the circuits, divided multiple panels (including this one), fractured countless lower courts, and otherwise created “havoc” in bankruptcy cases nationwide—all over a recurring question with billion-dollar aggregate stakes for thousands of Chapter 13 cases filed each year. All aspects of the debate have been fully exhausted, and additional percolation is pointless—the courts disagree over every facet of the question presented, and there is no chance this split will dissipate on its own. The question presented was the sole basis for the decision below, and this case is an ideal vehicle for resolving this entrenched conflict. The question presented is: Whether, under the Bankruptcy Code, debtors can voluntarily contribute to their own retirement accounts rather than pay back unsecured creditors—and if so, when (and in what amount) such contributions might be permissible. (I)