National City Bank v. Elliott (In Re Elliott)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting creditor’s argument that debtor’s plan must provide for payment in lump sum, as required by Ohio law, based upon power to modify secured creditor’s claim
• “the only limitation under § 1322(b)(5) is the time limit set forth under § 1322(d)”
• despite creditor’s acquisition of repossession title, redemption did not require a lump sum payment, and treatment of debt in the Chapter 13 plan was permitted by 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(3) and (5)
• applying Whiting Pools analysis to chapter 13 case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).