.jpg)
MFRS hearing and order after dismissal of case
Kirk:
Some judges rule as if the case was still open. Some dismiss as moot. You must know they judge.
Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503 310-328-1001-voice
> On Aug 6, 2014, at 8:58 PM, "Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
> Debtors voluntarily dismissed their chapter 13 case while an MFRS was pending. Case was dismissed with 180 day bar to filing a new case.
> Hearing on MFRS occurs subsequent to dismissal, and instead of the Motion being denied as moot, the MFRS was granted.
> Am I missing something? Doesn't the dismissal of the case make the MFRS hearing moot? Any ideas why the MFRS would be granted?
>
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yes the pending motion was disclosed.
On Aug 7, 2014 7:34 AM, "Bert Briones bertbri@ymail.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
>
> With the voluntary dismissal form they ask if motion are pending. Was
> this disclosed?
>
> Why would this stop a future motion to impose a stay?
>
>
> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> Date:08/06/2014 11:48 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] MFRS hearing and order after dismissal of case
>
>
>
> She is asking what boxes where checked under "relief requested" in
> particular I think she's curious about 8, 9, 10.
>
> I personally feel like the motion should have been moot.
>
> How does this work anyway? Your honor, we want relief from the stay. H:
> What stay? L: The stay that was in effect before the case was dismissed. I
> assume there aren't some strange facts/fraudulent behavior where the Judge
> would reserve the right to specifically grant RFS from future bk's. Might
> want to double check the order dismissing the case.
>
> Sincerely,
> Michael Avanesian
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
>> On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]"
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Kirk: Was there in rem relief being sought by the MFR?
>>>
>>> R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
>>> OFF: (818) 734-7223
>>> CEL: (818) 554-9922
>>>
>>>
>
>
Yes the pending motion was disclosed.
On Aug 7, 2014 7:34 AM, "Bert Briones bertbri@ymail.com [cdcbaa]" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
With the voluntary dismissal form they ask if motion are pending. Was this disclosed?Why would this stop a future motion to impose a stay?
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Devchael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com [cdcbaa]"
Date:08/06/2014 11:48 PM (GMT-08:00) To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] MFRS hearing and order after dismissal of case
She is asking what boxes where checked under "relief requested" in particular I think she's curious about 8, 9, 10.I personally feel like the motion should have been moot.
How does this work anyway? Your honor, we want relief from the stay. H: What stay? L: The stay that was in effect before the case was dismissed. I assume there aren't some strange facts/fraudulent behavior where the Judge would reserve the right to specifically grant RFS from future bk's. Might want to double check the order dismissing the case.
Sincerely, Michael AvanesianOn Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
She is asking what boxes where checked under "relief requested" in
particular I think she's curious about 8, 9, 10.
I personally feel like the motion should have been moot.
How does this work anyway? Your honor, we want relief from the stay. H:
What stay? L: The stay that was in effect before the case was dismissed. I
assume there aren't some strange facts/fraudulent behavior where the Judge
would reserve the right to specifically grant RFS from future bk's. Might
want to double check the order dismissing the case.
Sincerely,
Michael Avanesian
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
> On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi Kirk: Was there in rem relief being sought by the MFR?
>>
>> R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
>> OFF: (818) 734-7223
>> CEL: (818) 554-9922
>>
>>
>
She is asking what boxes where checked under "relief requested" in particular I think she's curious about 8, 9, 10.oot.
How does this work anyway? Your honor, we want relief from the stay. H: What stay? L: The stay that was in effect before the case was dismissed. I assume there aren't some strange facts/fraudulent behavior where the Judge would reserve the right to specifically grant RFS from future bk's. Might want to double check the order dismissing the case.
Sincerely, Michael AvanesianOn Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
>
> Hi Kirk: Was there in rem relief being sought by the MFR?
>
> R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
> OFF: (818) 734-7223
> CEL: (818) 554-9922
>
>
>
It was a standard MFRS motion. Not sure if that is what you are asking.
On Aug 6, 2014 9:16 PM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Hi Kirk: Was there in rem relief being sought by the MFR?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Debtors voluntarily dismissed their chapter 13 case while an MFRS was
pending. Case was dismissed with 180 day bar to filing a new case.
Hearing on MFRS occurs subsequent to dismissal, and instead of the Motion
being denied as moot, the MFRS was granted.
Am I missing something? Doesn't the dismissal of the case make the MFRS
hearing moot? Any ideas why the MFRS would be granted?
Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
Debtors voluntarily dismissed their chapter 13 case while an MFRS was pending. Case was dismissed with 180 day bar to filing a new case.Hearing on MFRS occurs subsequent to dismissal, and instead of the Motion being denied as moot, the MFRS was granted.
Am I missing something? Doesn't the dismissal of the case make the MFRS hearing moot? Any ideas why the MFRS would be granted?-- Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.