IN RE JOHNSON

THOMAS HOLMAN, Bankruptcy Judge

This decision resolves three matters that the court previously set for hearing on November 8, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable David E. Russell. The three matters are the debtors' motion to value the collateral of SN Servicing Corporation/Christiana Bank and Trust Company ("Christiana"), D.C. No. PGM-2, which was set for an evidentiary hearing on the date and time set forth above following Christiana's opposition. The debtors' unopposed motion to value the collateral of Beneficial California Inc. ("Beneficial"), D.C. No. PGM-1, was set for hearing with the motion to value Christiana's collateral so that the court would not reach inconsistent results. Christiana's objection to confirmation of the debtors' plan, D.C. No. PPR-1, was set for hearing with the motion to value Christiana's collateral because the resolution of the Christiana objection was dependent on the outcome of that motion.

On November 1, 2007, Christiana withdrew its opposition to the debtors' motion to value its collateral. Therefore, in the absence of any opposition, the debtors' motions to value the collateral of Christiana and Beneficial pursuant to Fed.R.Bankr.P. 3012 and 11 U.S.C. § 506(a), are granted. For the purposes of both motions, the creditors' collateral, real property located at 1424 63^rd Avenue, Sacramento, California 95822, had a value of $235,000.00 on the date of the petition. Homecoming Financial LLC holds the first deed of trust against the property with a balance of $244,381.26. Thus, $0.00 of Christiana's claim on its second deed of trust is an allowed secured claim and the balance of its claim is an allowed unsecured claim, and $0.00 of Beneficial's claim on its third deed of trust is an allowed secured claim and the balance of its claim is an allowed unsecured claim

Because the debtors' motion to value Christiana's collateral has been granted, Christiana's objection to confirmation of the plan is overruled. Christiana's objections to confirmation were based on debtors' proposed treatment of its claim. Because Christiana's allowed secured claim has been valued at $0.00, the plan is sufficiently funded to pay the allowed secured claim, and the debtors need not maintain post-petition payments to Christiana. Valuing Christiana's allowed secured claim at $0.00 is not an impermissible modification of the debtors' obligation to Christiana. See Nobleman v. American Savings Bank, 508 U.S. 324 (1993); In re Lam, 211 B.R. 36 (9^th Cir. BAP 1997).

Christiana's request for dismissal of this case is denied. Christiana has not cited any authority for dismissal of the case. A failure to cite the legal authority relied upon by the filing party is grounds for denial of the request. LBR 9014-1(d)(5), (1).

Because Christiana's objection to confirmation is overruled, confirmation of the debtors' plan filed on July 2, 2007 is granted. In the absence of any further opposition, the court finds that the plan complies with 11 U.S.C. §§ 1322(a) (b), 1323(c), and 1325(a).

As to the debtors' motions to value collateral and Christiana's objection to confirmation, the court will issue separate orders consistent with the foregoing ruling. Counsel for the debtors shall also submit an order confirming the plan using EDC form 3-081-03 (Rev. 7/1/03) that conforms to the foregoing ruling and which has been approved by the trustee. The title of the ordershall include a specific reference to the filing date of the amended plan.