.jpg)
Hold Over Residential Tenants
Reasonable minds can differ. I have won cases in the State Court, with
holdings that the prior BK precluded an award of damages for postpetition
possession.
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Fri, December 23, 2011 10:27:53 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Damages for holdover tenant are measured by the reasonable rental value of the
property. Prepetiton contract discharged, so landlord has to prove reasonable
rental rate.
Holdover Postpetition is a postpetition claim and damages can be awarded.
Repo of a car is different only because no suit necessary. Car company could
also sue for postpetition use.
Prepetition has no hyphen. It is a prefix. Same with postpetition, see section
552.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 22, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
wrote:
>I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take the
>position that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action
>to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment)
>does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever
>without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings
>quicker.
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
>
>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
>AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AM
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>
>
>I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser.
> So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor
>is liable.
>
>
>This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over
>tenant could stay forever, without paying.
>
>
>How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!
>
>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>818-347-5800
>
>On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after
>>the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for
>>post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential
>>tenant?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR
>>AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE
>>HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY>>REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY
>>PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US
>>IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
>>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PM
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>
>>
>>Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the
>>time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.
>>
>>
>>Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see
>>this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD.
>> They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is
>>post petition new debt.
>>
>>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>>818-347-5800
>>
>>On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Jonathan,
>>>
>>>
>>>what is your theory as to the liability?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>>>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>>>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
>>>AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>>THANK YOU.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
________________________________
>>>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>>>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>>
>>>
>>>Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
>>>
>>>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>>>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>>>818-347-5800
>>>
>>>On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz"
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises
>>>>after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally
>>>>liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon
>>>>some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter
>>>>filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving
>>>>quickly as to an eviction?
>>>>
>>>>
>Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic>Messages in this topic (7)
>
>Recent Activity:
> * New Database 1
>Visit Your Group
>MARKETPLACE
>Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the
>Yahoo! Toolbar now.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Damages for holdover tenant are measured by the reasonable rental value of the property. Prepetiton contract discharged, so landlord has to prove reasonable rental rate.
Holdover Postpetition is a postpetition claim and damages can be awarded.
Repo of a car is different only because no suit necessary. Car company could also sue for postpetition use.
Prepetition has no hyphen. It is a prefix. Same with postpetition, see section 552.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 22, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz wrote:
> I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take the position that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment) does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings quicker.
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
> LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
> 21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
> Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
> Telephone: (818) 226-1205
> Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>
>
> To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>
>
> I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser. So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor is liable.
>
> This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over tenant could stay forever, without paying.
>
> How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!
>
> Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
> Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
> 818-347-5800
>
> On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential tenant?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>> LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>> 21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>> Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>> Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>> Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>> To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>> Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>
>>
>> Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.
>>
>> Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.
>>
>>
>> The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD. They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is post petition new debt.
>>
>> Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>> Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>> 818-347-5800
>>
>> On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan,
>>>
>>> what is your theory as to the liability?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>> LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>> 21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>> Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>> Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>> Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>>>
>>>
>>> To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>>> Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>>
>>>
>>> Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
>>>
>>> Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>>> Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>>> 818-347-5800
>>>
>>> On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz" wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving quickly as to an eviction?
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
> Messages in this topic (7)
> RECENT ACTIVITY: New Database 1
> Visit Your Group
> MARKETPLACE
> Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
>
>
> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest Unsubscribe Terms of Use |**|end egp html banner|**| --
Damages for holdover tenant are measured by the reasonable rental value of the property. Prepetiton contract discharged, so landlord has to prove reasonable rental rate. Holdover Postpetition is a postpetition claim and damages can be awarded. Repo of a car is different only because no suit necessary. Car company could also sue for postpetition use.Prepetition has no hyphen. It is a prefix. Same with postpetition, see section 552.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 22, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take the position that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment) does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings quicker. Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED
ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
<cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser. So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor is liable.This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over tenant could stay forever, without paying.How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential tenant? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS
NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 8:07:15 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take theposition that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action
to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment)
does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever
without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings
quicker.
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser.
So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor
is liable.
This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over
tenant could stay forever, without paying.
How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!
Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
wrote:
>I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after
>the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for
>post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential
>tenant?
>
>
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
>
>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR
>AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE
>HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY>REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY>PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US
>IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PM
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>
>
>Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the
>time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.
>
>
>Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see
>this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.
>
>
>
>
>The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD.
> They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is
>post petition new debt.
>
>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>818-347-5800
>
>On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Jonathan,
>>
>>
>>what is your theory as to the liability?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
>>AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
>>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>
>>
>>Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
>>
>>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>>818-347-5800
>>
>>On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz"
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises
>>>after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally
>>>liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon
>>>some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter
>>>filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving
>>>quickly as to an eviction?
>>>
>>>
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE
RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.----- Forwarded Message ----From: Kenneth Jay Schwartz <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Thu, December 22, 2011 8:07:15 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take the position that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment) does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings quicker. Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED
ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
<cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser. So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor is liable.This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over tenant could stay forever, without paying.How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential tenant? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS
NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD. They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is post petition new debt.Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jonathan,what is your theory as to the liability? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY
REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take theposition that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action
to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment)
does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever
without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings
quicker.
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser.
So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor
is liable.
This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over
tenant could stay forever, without paying.
How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!
Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
wrote:
>I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after
>the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for
>post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential
>tenant?
>
>
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
>
>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR
>AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE
>HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY>REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY>PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US
>IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PM
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>
>
>Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the
>time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.
>
>
>Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see
>this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.
>
>
>
>
>The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD.
> They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is
>post petition new debt.
>
>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>818-347-5800
>
>On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Jonathan,
>>
>>
>>what is your theory as to the liability?
>>
>>
>>
>> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
>>AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
>>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>>
>>
>>Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
>>
>>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>>818-347-5800
>>
>>On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz"
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises
>>>after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally
>>>liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon
>>>some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter
>>>filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving
>>>quickly as to an eviction?
>>>
>>>
I disagree. The tenancy was created pre-petition, and therefore I take the position that the "indebtedness" arises from there. The UD is only the action to remove the debtor. It (other than the fact that it results in a judgment) does not create the debt. The remedy to prevent the tenant from staying forever without paying is for the landlord to prosecute the eviction proceedings quicker. Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED
ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
<cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Thu, December 22, 2011 7:01:59 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
I am not referring to a vehicle. Remember a hold over tenant is a trespasser. So a UD is filed to remove them. New post petition action. New debt. Debtor is liable.This is very common and happens all the time. If your logic applied a hold over tenant could stay forever, without paying.How can a bk protect a new post petition UD filing? Answer it cannot!Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential tenant? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS
NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD. They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is post petition new debt.Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jonathan,what is your theory as to the liability? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY
REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after
the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for
post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential
tenant?
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the
time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.
Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see
this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.
The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD. They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is
post petition new debt.
Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
wrote:
>Jonathan,
>
>
>what is your theory as to the liability?
>
>
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
>
>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
>BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
>CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
>AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
>
>
>Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
>
>Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
>Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
>818-347-5800
>
>On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz"
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises
>>after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally
>>liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon
>>some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter
>>filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving>>quickly as to an eviction?
>>
>>
I don't agree. If a Chapter 7 Debtor continues to drive a leased vehicle after the BK is filed, and has not assumed the lease, do you believe he is liable for post-petition payments? Why should the result be different as to a residential tenant? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS
NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:41:08 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Simple post petition debt under an unlawful detainer action. Happens all the time. If the owner/landlord does not file the UD could not recover.Remember the UD is a new court action which is a post petition new debt. I see this all the time when I work the BK self help desk.The debtor file pro per bk 7 and does not pay rent. Landlord files the UD. They come to the BK court and the Judge says not part of the bk because it is post petition new debt.Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "Kenneth Jay Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jonathan,what is your theory as to the liability? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY
REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Jonathan,
what is your theory as to the liability?
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.
Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz"
wrote:
>Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises
>after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally
>liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon
>some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter
>filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving>quickly as to an eviction?
>
>
Jonathan,what is your theory as to the liability? Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY
REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: "Leventhal Law Group, P.C." <law@3yl.com>To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Wed, December 21, 2011 9:23:08 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Hold Over Residential Tenants
Post petition debtor liable. If UD, then attorney fess costs etc.Jonathan Leventhal, esq.Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:10 PM, "Kenneth Schwartz" <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving quickly as to an eviction?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yesterday, a thread was started regarding tenants that hold over at the premises after their Chapter 7 has been filed. Should the Debtors be held personally liable for their post-petition possession, and, if so, is that just based upon some quasi contractual theory? Or, is there no liability because of the Chapter filing, and its just up to the landlord to mitigate its damages by moving quickly as to an eviction?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.