'Objection to confirmation of Plan'...what happens next?

[ColoradoBell]

Disclaimer: I like my attorney, but she admits she is not experienced in litigation.

X has filed a 10 pg objection to confirmation of plan citing the kitchen sink variety of complaints, defamations and accusations.

I've sent her a rebuttal to each of his points and am currently gathering up evidence. But what happens next? Do we file a 'response' to his objection?
Is this an AP which entails a hearing, depositions/exhibits/trial? Or are objections dealt with 'between lawyers' 'between lawyers and trustee' by negotiation first?

Also, similar question re Motion to Avoid Liens which we submitted last week. Objections due by next week. What happens next if there is an objection?

[HHM]

Yes, you would need to file a response.

No, this is not an AP; it is a contested matter. However, if the matter cannot be resolved, there will be a hearing and depending on the nature of the objection, exhibits and witnesses may be needed.

On the Motion to avoid liens, if there is an objection and the issue cannot be resolved, then there will be a hearing.

[ColoradoBell]

Thanks for the quick response, HHM! (I was hoping you would)

Should the response include evidence/exhibits to disprove X's objections or are those reserved for a subsequent hearing?

Who reads the objection and response... or is this something negotiated between the attorneys and they dicker back and forth in an attempt to strike a deal? Is the trustee involved?

I'm less concerned about the objections to things like (1) I don't make any income so I can't fund a plan (2) I didn't include an asset (3) my timeshare and my investment property are 'luxuries' which can be addressed straightforward. It is the 'accusations' that I "disobeyed family court orders" (I did not) and that I'm trespassing in the house because I was ordered to vacate it after it sold, that I want to nip in the bud before any false allegations have a chance to influence the trustee or judge.

[HHM]

If a 3rd party files an objection, it is between attorneys, the trustee is not involved. If it goes to a hearing, ultimately, the judge will decide.

Generally speaking, you would not submit evidence along with the response, but that is more a matter of tactics. It really depends on the nature of the claims involved. In these types of contested matters, it is usually best to marshal your evidence and supply it with the response (this way the evidence becomes part of the record )

[justbroke]

As HHM suggests, I provided Exhibits to any response to a motion by a creditor so that it is on the record. Holding back evidence and exhibits -- in contested matters -- is okay, but why not just inundate the record with evidence up front.

You may end up with two types of hearings and pay special attention to the "type" of hearing listed on the Notice of Hearing. The hearing will be either non-evidentiary or evidentiary. Also, beware of the word "final" being used in the notice, such a Notice of Final Evidentiary Hearing. If it's a non-evidentiary hearing, this will go quickly and it's basically a scheduling conference to see if it should continue to an evidentiary hearing. An evidentiary hearing is where evidence is presented and/or testimony heard. You'll need to know the Federal Rules of Evidence, especially around hearsay evidence, which is a good way to get most evidence tossed out.

I don't think the Judge will care for any of the nonsense items.

[ColoradoBell]

Thanks you guys...you are my two most favorite information providers and I appreciate the both of you!!!!!

The rules are different from State Court where I was representing myself after teh first 4 years (!)...There, if a motion is filed, a response and then a reply filed, the court makes a decision based on the motions unless it or one of the parties demands a hearing. So I sure didn't want to take filing a response to the objection lightly and then have the judge base a final ruling on just the response submission!

From what HHM said, I assume that the objection is more of an open gambit to start negotiations between lawyers???????While they talk, I'll gather up all the evidence to help my side of things. I sure hope that my attoney will be agressive in dealing with X's attorney. I also think that if we can get X's liens avoided (they should be void on 3 counts: impair homestead, the state court forbid either of us from encumbering the home, the 'liens' weren't based on 'judgments' but instead on X's random ideas for most part and they are preferential as they took unsecured debt and made it secured after he knew I was filing and within the 'insider' 1 year time period) that X might be FINALLY willing to let the buyout happen. If not,BK 363 will help me (I think) buyout his share at a price to him that is higher than he'd get with the sale to his intimate-Buyer!