The Court sustained the bank’s objection to confirmation of the debtors’ Chapter 11 plan because the pending adversary proceeding in the case must first be resolved before the debtors can put forth a confirmable and viable plan.  The central issue in this case is whether the debtors, utilizing their powers as Chapter 11 debtors-in-possession, can successfully avoid a restitutionary transaction they made with the bank.  The debtors encumbered their home prior to the filing of this bankruptcy case for the purpose of providing restitution for losses incurred by the bank as a result of the criminal actions of their son while employed as one of its loan officers.  Without a resolution of that matter, the Court could not confirm the debtors’ plan.