Gordon Mark Saker, 16-01046

Debtor George Saker confirmed a Chapter 13 plan providing set plan funding; certain "must-pay" claims (priority claims, trustee fees, court-approved attorney fees, cure arrears) must be paid in full for feasibility.
Plan funding was modified downward via a 2018 plan modification; debtor’s prior counsel obtained two fee orders (Fee Order 1 and Fee Order 2) authorizing additional attorney compensation with different provisos about payment "to the extent funds are available."
After Fee Order 2, plan funding remained insufficient to cover all must-pay claims (notably a federal tax priority claim and trustee fees), and a subsequent trustee calculated a shortfall and moved to dismiss for infeasibility.
Parties agreed some disgorgement by prior counsel was required; they disputed the correct amount and methodology (use 10% trustee fee prospectively vs. trustee’s actual historical percentage retrospectively) and whether Fee Order 2’s proviso could be adjusted.
The court concluded Fee Order 2’s plain proviso could not be modified; because the plan was complete, feasibility is measured retrospectively using the trustee’s actual fee percentage and prior counsel must return $1,388.49.
The court denied the trustee’s motion to dismiss and denied the request to shift current counsel’s fees to prior counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plan infeasibility (failure to fund must-pay claims) is cause to dismiss under §1307(c)	Trustee: shortfall exists; dismiss the case	Debtor: he completed plan payments; shortfall caused by others’ actions; dismissal unfair	Denied — dismissal not warranted where debtor completed payments and inequity exists
Whether prior counsel must disgorge fees paid that caused shortfall	Trustee: prior counsel should return funds to cover shortfall; use 10% trustee fee for feasibility (worst-case)	Prior counsel: disgorgement limited; if any, use trustee’s actual fee percentage; Fee Order 2’s proviso prevents downward adjustment	Court: disgorgement required but limited to $1,388.49 using trustee’s actual fee retrospectively; Fee Order 2 controls and cannot be modified
Whether feasibility calculations should use 10% trustee fee or actual historical fee	Trustee: use 10% prospectively to ensure worst-case feasibility	Prior counsel/Debtor: retrospective review may use actual trustee fee	Court: prospective feasibility uses 10%; but because plan is complete, retrospective actual fee governs to avoid Treasury windfall
Whether prior counsel must pay Debtor’s current counsel’s fees incurred litigating this dispute	Current counsel: seek fees from prior counsel	Prior counsel: no basis for fee-shifting	Denied — no authority to depart from American Rule; each side bears own fees

No reported cases cited; opinion relies on statutory provisions and the parties’ chapter 13 orders.