Robert Preston Kinann and Pamela Jean Kinann

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In re
ROBERT and PAMELA KINANN, No. 05-14605
Debtor(s).
______________________________________/
Memorandum of Decision
_________________
Debtors Robert and Pamela have proposed a plan whereby they will pay the Chapter 13 trustee
$650.00 per month for 36 months. They estimate a dividend of 11% to unsecured creditors, but the
actual dividend could be significantly less due to an unliquidated claim against them. The Chapter 13
trustee, joined by creditor Mario Zapalla, objects.
The debtors’ income is derived from Robert Kinann’s contracting business. However, the
California Contractor’s State Licensing Board has imposed a three-year suspension of his license. His
son, Robert S. Kinann, also has a contractor’s license. It appears that Kinann and his son have
considered their business relations as completely fluid, with the son at times being the employee, at
times being the sole contractor and at times being the joint contractor. This resulted in testimony from
Kinann at the hearing which was totally contrary to his testimony at his 341 hearing.
As a result of the conflicting testimony, Kinann cannot meet his burden of proving that all his
disposable income for 36 months will be applied to his payments, as required by § 1325(b)(1)(B) of the
Bankruptcy Code, or that he will be able to make all the payments under the plan as required by §
1325(a)(6).
In addition, Kinann’s demeanor on the stand was evasive and combative. His memory was
extraordinarily poor, and his explanations of inconsistent testimony lame. This was not all what the
court expects of a Chapter 13 debtor who has a burden of demonstrating that his plan meets the
Entered on Docket
March 02, 2006
GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK
U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case: 05-14605 Doc# 18 Filed: 03/02/06 Entered: 03/02/06 13:59:55 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
requirements of law. Accordingly, the court cannot even make the finding required by § 1325(a)(3) that
his plan is proposed in good faith.
For the foregoing reasons, confirmation will be denied and this case will be dismissed unless
within 10 days of entry of this memorandum the debtors have elected to convert their case to Chapter 7.
The Chapter 13 trustee shall submit an appropriate form of order.
Dated: March 2, 2006
SAlan Jaroslovsky
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
Case: 05-14605 Doc# 18 Filed: 03/02/06 Entered: 03/02/06 13:59:55 Page 2 of 2