Sylvester Traylor, 628 B.R. 1

Background

Debtor Sylvester Traylor filed a Chapter 13 petition on Nov. 22, 2019; his schedules reflected a negative monthly net income but he proposed monthly plan payments to cure tax arrears.
Town of Waterford held a secured tax claim (~$74,767.84); the bankruptcy court granted the Town relief from the automatic stay.
Over the year-long case the Debtor filed multiple amended plans that increased proposed payments but failed to produce corroborating income documentation or to cure Trustee objections.
The Chapter 13 Trustee repeatedly objected for lack of feasibility, missing documents, plan nonconformity to filed claims, and incorrect interest treatment; the Debtor largely failed to comply with discovery and court orders.
At an evidentiary hearing the Debtor offered self‑prepared profit/loss statements and pledged family assistance without corroboration; no family members testified.
Court found cause to dismiss for unreasonable delay, plan infeasibility, and lack of good faith, and dismissed the case with a two‑year bar to refiling.

Issues

Issue	Trustee's Argument	Debtor's Argument	Held
Whether §1307(c)(1) dismissal for unreasonable delay prejudicial to creditors is warranted	Case pending >1 year; Debtor ignored document requests and court orders; post‑petition taxes unpaid; delay prejudices Town	Debtor asserted increased income and forthcoming payments; offered recent payment to Trustee and self‑prepared statements	Court: Dismissal for cause under §1307(c)(1) affirmed — unreasonable, prejudicial delay established
Whether §1307(c)(5) dismissal for denial of confirmation (infeasibility) is warranted	Debtor failed to prove ability to make proposed payments; family contributions unsubstantiated; plans unconfirmable	Debtor claimed new employment and family help would fund plan; offered bank statements and a check	Court: Dismissal under §1307(c)(5) affirmed — debtor failed burden to show feasibility
Whether lack of good faith supports dismissal	Repeated filing of unfeasible plans, failure to cooperate, pattern of delay (including prior dismissed case) shows bad faith and abuse to delay foreclosure	Debtor disputed Trustee computations and asserted intent to cure via higher payments and outside contributions	Court: Lack of good faith found on totality of circumstances; supports dismissal for cause
Whether dismissal can be with prejudice / bar refiling under §349(a) and §105(a)	Given bad faith, repeated non‑compliance, and abusive filings, court should bar refiling to prevent further abuse	Debtor did not offer compelling reason to prohibit refiling; proposed to amend plan further	Court: Under §§349(a) and 105(a) dismissal with prejudice and two‑year bar to any bankruptcy filing ordered

Key Cases Cited

In re Jensen, 425 B.R. 105 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2010) (§1325(a)(6) feasibility central to confirmation)
In re Felberman, 196 B.R. 678 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1995) (unsubstantiated third‑party contributions insufficient for feasibility)
In re Ciarcia, 578 B.R. 495 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2017) (lack of good faith can be cause to dismiss under §1307(c))
In re Armstrong, 409 B.R. 629 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2009) (totality‑of‑circumstances test for bad faith)
In re Casse, 219 B.R. 657 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1998) (§349 permits dismissal with prejudice to refiling for cause)
In re Oi Brasil Holdings Cooperatief U.A., 578 B.R. 169 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2017) (§105(a) empowers court to prevent abuse and implement orders)