Opinion ID: 3173092
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: earnings from services performed by

Text: the debtor after the commencement of the case but before the case is closed, dismissed, or converted to a case under chapter 7, 12, or 13, whichever occurs first. 11 U.S.C. § 1115(a) (emphasis added). Finally, BAPCPA amended the absolutely priority rule itself, adding the underscored language to § 1129(b)(2)(B)(ii): ZACHARY V. CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST 9 [T]he condition that a plan be fair and equitable with respect to a class [of creditors] includes the following requirements: .... (B) With respect to a class of unsecured claims–
of a claim of such class receive or retain on account of such claim property of a value, as of the effective date of the plan, equal to the allowed amount of such claim; or
that is junior to the claims of such class will not receive or retain under the plan on account of such junior claim or interest any property, except that in a case in which the debtor is an individual, the debtor may retain property included in the estate under section 1115, subject to the requirements of subsection (a)(14) of this section. Pub. L. No. 109-8, § 321, 119 Stat. 23, 95 (emphasis added). The new clauses in subsection (B)(ii) plainly create an exception to the absolute priority rule that applies only to a chapter 11 “case in which the debtor is an individual.” 11 U.S.C. § 1129(b)(2)(B)(ii). But the question is, what is the exception’s scope? Or, put another way, what property may an individual chapter 11 debtor retain “without running 10 ZACHARY V. CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST afoul of the absolute priority rule”? In re Friedman, 466 B.R. at 487 (Jury, Bankr. J., dissenting).