Harry Edward Gough

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
HARRY EDWARD GOUGH,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 07-00554
(Chapter 7)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING
ON MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY,
REQUIRING MAILING OF MOTION TO DEBTOR AND TRUSTEE, 	AND
SETTING NEW DEADLINE FOR RESPONSES TO MOTION AND A
DEADLINE FOR PARTIES TO RESPOND TO COURT’S TENTATIVE RULING
The debtor’s wife has filed a motion for relief of the
automatic stay seeking an order that would provide that the stay
is lifted to permit the parties to:
complete their divorce case, No 2007-DRB 002638, being
conducted in the Superior Court of the District of
Columbia.
The order would also permit the Superior Court to decree a
division of the parties’ properties. 	So far, so good, as the
Superior Court is better suited than this court to decree a
division of marital property (and is just as well suited to make
a determination of what property was not marital property).
The Memorandum Decision and Order below is hereby
signed. Dated: August 20, 2008.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 07-00554 Doc 156 Filed 08/20/08 Entered 08/20/08 18:19:43 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 4

2
I
The order, however, would further provide that:
The divorce court may make its ruling regarding the
division of the property of the divorcing parties but
such a ruling may not be executed and no transfers of
the property shall be allowed until this court has
review[ed] and ruled upon the matter in the context of
the pending bankruptcy case.
I propose to remove the language “but such a ruling may not be
executed and no transfers of the property shall be allowed until
this court has review and ruled upon the matter in the context of
the pending bankruptcy case,” and to replace it with “but such a
ruling may not be executed as to the division of property and no
transfers of the property shall be allowed pending any appeal of
the Superior Court ruling by the chapter 7 trustee.” 	The chapter
7 trustee has an obvious stake in how the marital property is
divided. 	He could intervene in the divorce proceeding in order
to protect the interests of the estate, and the staying of any
disposition of the property pending any appeal by the chapter 7
trustee would protect the chapter 7 trustee with respect to any
erroneous ruling by the Superior Court regarding division of the
marital property. 	I question the propriety of this Court’s
retaining jurisdiction to review and rule upon the matter of the
division of the marital property. 	Under the Rooker-Feldman
doctrine, a federal trial court cannot operate as an appellate
court of review regarding state court adjudications. 	I would
thus not include any provision in the order granting relief from
Case 07-00554 Doc 156 Filed 08/20/08 Entered 08/20/08 18:19:43 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 4

3
the automatic stay that would suggest that this court would
review the Superior Court’s ruling.
II
The wife’s motion was not served on the chapter 7 trustee as
the case was converted to chapter 7 after the wife’s motion was
filed. 	Even if service on the chapter 7 trustee were not
required (on the theory that service on the debtor-in-possession
was service on the representative of the estate, and the chapter
7 trustee was obligated to review the case upon being appointed),
I am concerned that the initial chapter 7 trustee was not
appointed until August 1, 2008, very shortly before a response to
the motion was due. 	Moreover, that initial trustee resigned on
August 20, 2008 and Wendell W. Webster was not appointed as
replacement trustee until August 20, 2008. 	I will thus give the
chapter 7 trustee an opportunity to respond to the motion.
I also note that the debtor was not mailed a copy of the
motion. 	The debtor’s wife should mail a copy of the motion to
the debtor as mailing a copy to only the debtor’s attorney was
not adequate service on the debtor.
III
In light of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that by August 22, 2008, the debtor’s wife, through
counsel, shall file a certificate of mailing copies of the motion
to the debtor and the current chapter 7 trustee. 	It is further
Case 07-00554 Doc 156 Filed 08/20/08 Entered 08/20/08 18:19:43 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 4

4	O:\TEEL\Judge Temp Docs\Gough (Harry) Order Continuing Wife's Lift Stay Motion.wpd
ORDERED that by September 2, 2008, the chapter 7 trustee,
Wendell W. 	Webster, and the debtor may file a response to the
debtor’s wife’s motion and a response to the court’s proposal to
grant relief with the modification discussed above. 	It is
further.
ORDERED that by September 2, 2008, the debtor’s wife may
file a response to the court’s proposal to grant relief with the
modification discussed above. 	It is further
ORDERED that if no one files a response, the court may grant
the motion with the proposed modification without a hearing. 	It
is further
ORDERED that the hearing on the motion, unless the motion is
disposed of beforehand, is continued to September 4, 2008, at
2:00 p.m.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Paul Pearlstein, Esq.; Debtor; Debtor’s attorney;
Chapter 7 Trustee; Office of United States Trustee.
Case 07-00554 Doc 156 Filed 08/20/08 Entered 08/20/08 18:19:43 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 4