Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): as such, did not create a security interest); In re Murray, 191 B.R. 309 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1996) (concluding that vehicle lease was a true lease and not an installment purchase agreement with a security interest), aff'd, 201 B.R. 381 (E.D.Pa.1996). Because the Lease is a true lease, it must be treated as so in the Debtor’s Plan. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(7), a debtor may provide for the assumption of an unexpired lease in his or her Chapter 13 plan. Howeve .2003) (ruling that § 1322(b)(2) precluded the debtor from modifying the rights of her motor vehicle lessor, including its right to be paid a lump sum payment for the vehicle’s purchase price upon the debtor’s exercise of the purchase option under their motor vehicle lease); In re Winston, 181 B.R. 589, 594 (Bankr.N.D.Ala.1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Weske, 203 B.R. 694 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that since motor vehicle contract between the debtor and fifth third bank was a lease and not a security agreement the debtor was required to treat fifth third banks claim in his chapter 13 plan as a lease and not as a secured debt which meant that the debtor could not obligate fifth third bank to finance the purchase of his vehicle (B) holding that the debtor could not treat a lessor as a secured creditor by paying the present value of the purchase option price of the lease through her chapter 13 plan (C) holding that the secured creditor was only entitled to the amount of its claim as provided in the debtors chapter 13 plan when the destruction of the vehicle yielded insurance proceeds greater than the secured creditors claim (D) holding plan properly vacated with respect to chapter 13 creditor who received actual notice of proceedings but did not receive adequate notice that court would value secured claim at the confirmation hearing (E) recognizing that a lessees holding over without giving the prescribed notice of renewal gave rise to a presumption that the lessee was exercising the option to renew but also recognizing that in such a situation the lessor could elect to treat the lessee as a trespasser or to waive the notice requirement and treat the lease as having been extended
Output (English): holding that since motor vehicle contract between the debtor and fifth third bank was a lease and not a security agreement the debtor was required to treat fifth third banks claim in his chapter 13 plan as a lease and not as a secured debt which meant that the debtor could not obligate fifth third bank to finance the purchase of his vehicle