.jpg)
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Does_closing_without_discharge_trigger_=A7_362=28c?=
Dear Colleagues,
In case anyone is interested in the answer to my question about the
applicability of 362(c)(3) when the prior case was closed without a
discharge for failure to take the second course:
As it turns out, the motion is technically moot for the simple reason that
the debtors prior case was not dismissed but rather closed without entry of
a discharge. Thus, the 30-day limitation on the automatic stay in
362(c)(3), Bankruptcy Code, by its own terms does not apply.
In re Anderson, 08-14743-SSM, Bankr. E.D. Va. 2008
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Dear cdcbaa Brain Trust,
I have a client whose Chapter 7 case was closed without a discharge in April
2017 because he didnt take the postpetition course. He came to me to stop
a foreclosure that is set for next Monday, so we must file quickly.
My reading of 362(c)(3) is that the stay would terminate on the thirtieth
day after filing the second case only if the prior case had been dismissed.
Therefore, since it wasnt dismissed, just closed without a discharge, 362(c)(3) isnt implicated. Anyone disagree?
Thanks for your thoughts,
Nick
Nicholas Gebelt
Nicholas Gebelt, Ph.D., J.D.
Attorney at Law
Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist State Bar of California Board of Legal
Specialization
Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt
15150 Hornell Street
Whittier, CA 90604
Phone: 562.777.9159
FAX: 562.946.1365
Email: ngebelt@goodbye2debt.com
Web: www.goodbye2debt.com
Blog:
www.southerncaliforniabankruptcylawblog.com/
Important notice required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief agency.
We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
Confidentiality Note: This e-mail is intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone
other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you
have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately at
562.777.9159 or e-mail info@gebeltlaw.com and
destroy the original message and all copies.
Representation Note: If you have not signed a contract of representation,
the Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt do not represent you, and this email does
not contain any legal advice for you.
Privacy Warning: The use of e-mail involves risk that the message may be
intercepted by third parties (such as the government). Contacting me by
email is your acknowledgment that you waive the risk of emails sent to me,
and that you waive the risk of emails sent from me to you. Further,
accessing websites carries the risk of detection of your access not only in
real time, but also by discovery. If you have ANYTHING that is sensitive to
convey to me, it should be given in a face-to-face meeting.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with the requirements
imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax
advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not
intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding
penalties under the Internal Revenue code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.