Skip to main content

§ 362(c)(4)

In re Winters

Ruling
Stay imposed in debtors'third case in one-year period due to favorable change in debtors'financial position.
Procedural posture

Because the debtors had two cases pending within the year preceding this case, the automatic stay did not go into effect when they filed. Accordingly, the debtors filed a motion to impose the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4).

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

opinion summary, case decided on November 22, 2006 , LexisNexis #0107-041

In re Oritz

Ruling
Court refused to reconsider decision not to impose stay in debtor's third case in one year where evidence of good faith was unpersuasive.
Procedural posture

After a court denied the imposition of a stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4), the debtor filed a motion to reconsider that order to prevent a creditor from repossessing the debtor's car. The debtor asserted that the court applied the wrong legal standard to the evidence presented at the hearing.

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

opinion summary, case decided on November 20, 2006 , LexisNexis #0107-073

Dixon v. Fannie Mae

Ruling
No stay was in effect where debtors had two cases pending and dismissed in the year prior to filing.
Procedural posture

Appellants sought review of an order of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, which confirmed that no automatic stay was in effect.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Dixon v. Fannie Mae Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on November 20, 2006 , LexisNexis #1206-039

In re Schroeder

Ruling
Automatic stay that did not arise upon filing of debtors'third chapter 13 case reinstated upon showing of good faith.
Procedural posture

The chapter 13 debtors filed a motion to invoke the automatic stay, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4)(B).

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

opinion summary, case decided on October 18, 2006 , LexisNexis #0307-007

In re Murray

Ruling
Although stay was not in effect in debtors'third chapter 13 filing, any action by creditor involving property of the estate was to be brought in bankruptcy court.
Procedural posture

A creditor filed a motion for an order confirming the inapplicability of the automatic stay, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(C)(ii). The debtors responded that a creditor action involving the debtors'property was to occur exclusively in bankruptcy court during the pendency of the chapter 13 case.

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

opinion summary, case decided on September 11, 2006 , LexisNexis #1006-040

In re Haisley

Ruling
Case dismissed as to debtor with two prior bankruptcies but not as to debtor spouse with no prior filings.
Procedural posture

After the debtor husband and wife filed a joint bankruptcy petition, a creditor filed an ex parte request for an order pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(4)(A)(ii), asking the court to confirm that no automatic stay was in effect because the debtor husband had two bankruptcies dismissed within the year preceding the filing of the pending case.

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

opinion summary, case decided on July 18, 2006 , LexisNexis #1106-008

In re Frazier

Ruling
Foreclosure creditor was denied a motion for reconsideration of an order imposing a stay since the debtor's most recent filing was made in good faith and the creditor had received notice of a hearing on the stay.
Procedural posture

A debtor filed a bankruptcy petition after her prior bankruptcy cases were dismissed, and the debtor sought a bankruptcy stay to preclude an impending foreclosure proceeding against the debtor's property. The foreclosing creditor moved for reconsideration of the bankruptcy court's order which granted the debtor's emergency motion to impose the stay.

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

opinion summary, case decided on March 17, 2006 , LexisNexis #0406-004

In re Beasley

Ruling
Court ruled that Code section 362(c)(4)(B) for imposing an automatic stay in a subsequent filing applied both to debtors with only one other case within the prior year and those with more than one case.
Procedural posture

The debtor previously filed bankruptcy under chapter 13 on April 25, 2005. That case was dismissed on December 14, 2005. The debtor then filed for bankruptcy again under chapter 13 on January 4, 2006. Before the court was the debtor's motion to impose the automatic stay.

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

opinion summary, case decided on March 16, 2006 , LexisNexis #0306-110

In re Parker

Ruling
Court ruled that an automatic stay applied to one joint debtor but not the other since one had filed other petitions within a year of filing while the other debtor had not made such filings.
Procedural posture

A debtor and a joint debtor filed a joint chapter 13 case. A creditor filed an application for an order confirming that no automatic stay was in effect as to the debtor and the joint debtor. The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 applied to the case because the case was filed after the October 17, 2005 effective date of the Act.

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

opinion summary, case decided on January 04, 2006 , LexisNexis #0206-094

In re Wilson

Ruling
Debtors were denied unopposed motions to impose automatic stays despite prior recent filings since they did not overcome presumption of bad faith.
Procedural posture

Three chapter 13 debtors filed motions asking the court to extend the automatic stay beyond the 30-day automatic expiration period set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(A). A creditor of one of these debtors opposed the motion. Two other chapter 13 debtors filed unopposed motions to impose the automatic stay pursuant to section 362(c)(4)(B).

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

opinion summary, case decided on December 05, 2005 , LexisNexis #0106-038