In Re Richall, 470 B.R. 245

Debtors filed Chapter 13 on July 19, 2011 and submitted a Plan on December 30, 2011.
Schedules I and J show monthly net income of $886.42; Form B22C classifies debtors as above median.
Disposable income under § 1325(b)(2) is $1,756.21 per month.
Plan proposes $835/mo for 5 months and $855/mo for 55 months (60-month commitment).
Trustee moved to dismiss asserting the plan lacks good faith under § 1325(a)(3) for not using all disposable income.
Court confirmed the Plan over the Trustee’s objections and denied the Motion to Dismiss.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plan compliance requires using all disposable income under § 1325(b)(1)(A)/(B).	Trustee: plan must allocate all disposable income or pay in full.	Richalls: § 1325(b) allows payment of creditors in full over five years without using all disposable income.	Plan compliant under § 1325(b)(1)(A); not required to commit all disposable income.
Effect of BAPCPA on plan term for above-median debtors.	Trustee: promotes longer terms and slower payment.	Richalls: term must be five years for above-median debtors unless paid in full.	BAPCPA sets five-year term for above-median debtors unless creditors are paid in full.
Whether the plan was proposed in good faith under § 1325(a)(3).	Trustee: lack of best effort and time-value risk show bad faith.	Richalls: no misconduct; good faith shown by plan structure and disclosure.	Plan filed in good faith; Trustee's motion to dismiss denied.

In re Sullivan, 326 B.R. 204 (1st Cir. BAP 2005) (good-faith analysis in Chapter 13 using totality of circumstances)
Jones, 374 B.R. 469 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2007) (above-median calculations and § 1325(b) means test clarifications)
In re O'Neill Miranda, 449 B.R. 182 (Bankr. D.P.R. 2011) (totality of circumstances approach to good-faith inquiry)
In re Keach, 243 B.R. 851 (1st Cir. BAP 2000) (limits of good-faith analysis post-BAPCPA; focus on code provisions)