"The United States District court for the Eastern District of Tennessee has also looked at the issue of whether mobile homes are subject to cram down. In In re Shepherd, 381 B.R. 675 (E.D. Tenn., 2008), the debtor (Shepherd) financed a mobile home with EMC Mortgage Corporation. Shepherd ultimately filed Chapter 13 and sought to cram down the mobile home in her Chapter 13 plan, to which EMC objected. The Shepherd court stated “…many other courts have considered the issue, and the majority of courts have found that the statutory definition of ‘debtor’s principal residence’ in §101(13A)(A) does not alter the requirement of §1322(b)(2) that the property in question be real property. E.g., In re Gearhart, No. 07-70232, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 4281 (E.D.Ky. Dec. 14, 2007); In re Logan, No. 07-70212, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 4280 (Bankr.E.D.Ky. Dec. 14, 2007); In re Fuller, No. 07-81703, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3765 (Bankr.M.D.N.C. Nov. 2, 2007); In re Oliviera, 378 B.R. 789 (Bankr.E.D.Tex. 2007); Herrin v. GreenTree-AL, LLC, 376 B.R. 316 (Bankr.S.D.Ala.2007), aff’g In re Herrin, No. 06-12249-WSS-13, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2333 (Bankr.S.D.Ala. July 3, 2007) (en banc); In re Bartolome, No. 07-10731-DHW, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3263 (Bankr.M.D.Ala. Sept. 21, 2007); In re Rivers-Jones, No. 07-02607-JW, 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2992 (Bankr.D.S.C. Sept. 4, 2007); In re McLain, 376 B.R. 492 (Bankr.D.S.C.2007); In re Manning, No. BK 07-70190-CMS-13, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2595 (Bankr.N.D.Ala. Aug. 2, 2007); In re Coleman, 373 B.R. 907 (Bankr.W.D.Mo.2007); In re Cox, No. 07-60073, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2218 (Bankr.S.D.Tex. June 29, 2007); see also 2-101 XXXXX XXXXX Collier, collier on Bankruptcy P 101.13A (15th ed.2007). But see In re Fells, No. 07-80559, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3748 (Bankr.W.D.La. Oct. 23, 2007); HSBC v. Lunger, 370 B.R. 649 (Bankr.M.D.Pa.2007); In re Kenneth, 373 B.R. 46 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 2007). This court finds itself bound to follow the majority.” Thus, the Shepherd court found that only real property which is the debtor’s primary residence is protected from being crammed down."
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).