Richard Pasquel Romero and Brenda Louise Romero

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING
In re 	)
)
RICHARD PASQUEL ROMERO 	) 	Case No. 09-20980
BRENDA LOUISE ROMERO, 	) 	CHAPTER 13
)
Debtors. 	)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER came before the Court on February 2, 2010, for an evidentiary hearing
on confirmation of the Debtors' Amended Chapter 13 Plan dated November 17,2009
("Amended Plan"), and the objections of Mark R Stewart, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee. The
debtors were represented by their attorney Ken McCartney. The Trustee appeared pro se. The
Court being fully advised in the matter, finds and concludes as follows:
1. 	The Trustee objected to the Amended Plan for the following reasons: (1) the plan
fails to pay all Debtors' disposable income to unsecured creditors; and (2) the plan
is not feasible. The Trustee argued that Debtors' projected disposable income
should be based on previous years' tax returns.
2. 	Debtors contended that, although their income was substantially more in previous
tax years, as reflected on their tax returns, due to medical issues and the economic
conditions that caused Mr. Romero to be furloughed, their current income is not
near the income they previously made.
3 	Mrs. Romero has medical issues that resulted in her not working in 2009. She
testified that the medical issues were resolved and she is applying and
interviewing for jobs.
4. 	As a conductor for the railroad, Mr. Romero makes six trips every two weeks
Case 09-20980 Doc 42 Filed 02/17/10 Entered 02/17/10 10:24:29 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 2

between Cheyenne and Rawlins. Mr. Romero testified that he was on family
medical leave from his job due to his wife's medical issues during part of2009.
Anytime that he took the family medical leave he did not get paid, resulting in a
decrease in his income. He also testified that he had begun working more steadily
in January, only having to take one day of family medical leave.
Discussion
A debtor's actual circumstances at the time of plan confirmation are properly taken into
account in order to project, or forecast, how much income the debtor would actually receive
during the plan commitment period. J Lanning is the controlling law in the Tenth Circuit.
The Court, in considering the debtors' current employment circumstances, cannot find
that it is reasonable to impute a wage to either, based on their historical data. In this case, it
would not be so much a forecast, but speculation and a "guess" of what their income may be in
the future. Therefore, the Trustee's objection is overruled and the Amended Plan will be
confirmed by separate order.
DATED this I 	/' day of February, 2010.
Service to:
Ken McCartney
Mark Stewart
lIn re Lanning, 545 F.3rd 1269 (2008) (Certiorari granted, in part, Hamilton v. Lanning,
129 S. Ct. 2820 (2009).
Case 09-20980 Doc 42 Filed 02/17/10 Entered 02/17/10 10:24:29 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 2