1:09-bk-12470•Karen V Kayne
Full text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA In re KAREN V. KANE, No. 09-12470 Debtor(s). ______________________________________/ Memorandum on Motion for Relief From Stay _________________ This Chapter 7 case was opened on August 3, 2009. The debtor’s discharge was entered on December 1, 2009 and the case closed on December 7, 2009. The case was reopened on February 9, 2010, and the debtor’s discharge was subsequently revoked. Creditor CitiMorgtage, Inc., has now moved for relief from the automatic stay to foreclose on the debtor’s real property at 17682 Carriger Rd., Sonoma, California. CitiMortgage argues that because the debtor’s discharge has been revoked and the trustee has abandoned the property it is entitled to an order lifting the automatic stay. Ordinarily, that is so. See 11 U.S.C § 362(c)(1) and § 362(c)(2)(C). However, this case is governed by § 362(c)(2)(A), which provides that the automatic stay terminates when the case is closed. Reopening the case does not revive or reimpose the automatic stay. In re Menk, 241 B.R. 896, 914 (9th Cir.BAP1999) (“[T]o the extent that the automatic stay expired in conjunction with closing, it does not automatically spring back into effect. If protection is warranted after a case is reopened, then an injunction would need to be imposed.”); In re Gruetzmacher, 145 B.R. 270, 273 (Bankr.W.D.Wis.1991); Burke v. United States 1 Entered on Docket April 21, 2011 GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case: 09-12470 Doc# 72 Filed: 04/21/11 Entered: 04/21/11 14:35:44 Page 1 of 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 (In re Burke), 198 B.R. 412, 416 (Bankr.S.D.Ga.1996); In re Trevino, 78 B.R. 29 (Bankr.M.D.Pa.1987). The motion is therefore unnecessary and pointless. For the foregoing reasons, the motion will be denied as moot. Counsel for CitiMortgage may submit an appropriate form of order to that effect. Dated: April 21, 2011 SAlan Jaroslovsky U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 2 Case: 09-12470 Doc# 72 Filed: 04/21/11 Entered: 04/21/11 14:35:44 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.