Skip to main content

§ 362(a)(5)

Calahorra, In re

Ruling
Creditor was allowed an unsecured claim as the court had to honor a state court defaultjudgment although it was obtained in apparent violation of the debtor's due process rights.(Bankr. D.N.M.)
Issue(s)
Automatic Stay; Scope; Acts to Create, Perfect or Enforce Liens Securing Claims.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Calahorra, In re Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

:
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Consumer opinion summary, case decided on June 28, 2022 , LexisNexis #0822-030

Gasprom Inc. v. Fateh (In re Gasprom Inc.)

Ruling
Bankruptcy court erred in holding foreclosure on abandoned gas station did not violate stay and retroactively anulling stay to validate sale.
Issue(s)
Did bankruptcy court err in holding that postpetition foreclosure of debtor's principal asset, a gas station, did not violate the automatic stay because the stay had terminated by operation of law as a result of the chapter 7 trustee's abandonment.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Gasprom Inc. v. Fateh (In re Gasprom Inc.) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Commercial opinion summary, case decided on October 28, 2013 , LexisNexis #1213-008

In re James

Ruling
Notices of sale of tax liens containing legend required by Fair Debt Collection Practices Act did not violate stay.
Procedural posture

In separate cases, bankruptcy debtors moved for a finding that communications to the debtors from the former servicer of municipal tax liens against the debtors constituted attempts to collect prepetition debts from the debtors in violation of the automatic bankruptcy stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(5).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re James Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on July 09, 2007 , LexisNexis #0907-042