.jpg)
Automatic Stay
charset="windows-1251"
Not sure I agree with my brother Dennis. So long as NOTHING in the
complaint is changed as to the Debtor and the amended complaint is not
served on the Debtor, I don't see how this is any different than a
substitution of a named party for a Doe Defendant.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
Specialization.
Dennis McGoldrick
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 11:09 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Automatic Stay
yes
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
After being sued by Plaintiff in state court, Debtor filed chapter 7
bankruptcy, and state court suit was stayed. Must Plaintiff seek
relief from stay before filing an amended complaint in state court
suit naming additional defendants?
Alik Segal
Alik.Segal@gmail.com
310-362-6157
Cal. CD, Los Angeles
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Most cases say yes. One or two odd ones say no.
Dennis McGoldrick
350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
Torrance, CA 90503
On Jun 11, 2010, at 4:06 PM, "sesmithesq" wrote:
> Does the distinction between the automatic stay as it applies to
> individuals and the stay as to "the estate" still apply post-BARF,
> particularly in regards to multiple filers?
>
>
Most cases say yes. One or two odd ones say no.Dennis McGoldrick350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207BTorrance, CA 90503On Jun 11, 2010, at 4:06 PM, "sesmithesq" <sesmithesq@aol.com> wrote:
Does the distinction between the automatic stay as it applies to individuals and the stay as to "the estate" still apply post-BARF, particularly in regards to multiple filers?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Most cases say yes. One or two odd ones say no.
Dennis McGoldrick
350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
Torrance, CA 90503
On Jun 11, 2010, at 4:06 PM, "sesmithesq" wrote:
> Does the distinction between the automatic stay as it applies to
> individuals and the stay as to "the estate" still apply post-BARF,
> particularly in regards to multiple filers?
>
>
Most cases say yes. One or two odd ones say no.Dennis McGoldrick350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207BTorrance, CA 90503On Jun 11, 2010, at 4:06 PM, "sesmithesq" <sesmithesq@aol.com> wrote:
Does the distinction between the automatic stay as it applies to individuals and the stay as to "the estate" still apply post-BARF, particularly in regards to multiple filers?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.