is that the debtor should always be given the opportunity to repay his debts .... S. Rep. No. 95-989, at 94 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.A.A.N. 5787, 5880 (emphasis added). See also H.R. Rep. No. 95-595, at 380 (1977), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.A.A.N. 5963, 6336. With regard to this legislative history, at least one court has noted that: [T]he legislative committee's choice of 'absolute' in regard to Section 706(a) is infelicitous to say the least and has spawned an interpretation of the statute couched in hyperbolic terms very much at odds with the equitable considerations of eligibility, good faith and appropriateness which are inherent in a court's review of the facts and circumstances in any request brought on by motion. In re Marcakis, 254 B.R. 77, 79 (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.2000)
holding that a debtors right to convert his or her chapter 7 case is not absolute holding denial of motion to convert from chapter 11 to chapter 7 is interlocutory holding debtor had absolute right to convert under  706a holding that an order striking a standing trustees motion to convert a chapter 13 petition to a chapter 7 is interlocutory not final holding that a bankruptcy courts decision to convert or dismiss a chapter 11 case is a matter within its discretion