result of the vesting language in the Order of Confirmation, the Property, including the equity above the mortgage and the Debtor’s exemption, vested in the Debtor on confirmation and is no longer property of the estate. As such, the Debtor was not required to file an application to employ the Broker....” 233 B.R. at 198. 19 . In In re Talbot, 124 F.3d 1201, 1208 n. 9 (10th Cir.1997), the court observed the following: the Trustee argues in the alternative that even if the Talbots’ residence was not property of the estate, the sales proceeds representing post-confirmation appreciation in value of the residence constitutes property of the estate pursuant to § 1306(a)(1). This is a dubious argument. See Black v. United States Postal Service (In re Heath), 115 F.3d 521, 524 (7th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). Because, however, the Trustee did not raise
holding that bankruptcy plan of reorganization rather than  1961 controlled the setting of the interest rate holding creditors lacked standing to file an adversary action asserting the interests of the estate in seeking to prevent a former principal of the debtor from interfering with the chapter 11 reorganization given the lack of showing of the debtors consent and any determination by the bankruptcy court that the suit would be beneficial to the estate and necessary to a fair and efficient resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings holding that a bankruptcy court has the authority to order the irs to apply the payments to trust fund liabilities if the bankruptcy court determines that this designation is necessary to the success of a reorganization plan holding that postconfirmation income that is not necessary to the fulfillment of the plan of reorganization does not become part of the bankruptcy estate recognizing broad scope of the reorganization estate