.jpg)
ZURZOLO QUESTION re Automatic Stay..... Dear Memb=
Zurzolo follows Rinard as to second cases under 362(c)(3)--he does not
think it is necessary to continue the stay as to property of the estate in
such cases.
However, in a third case, my guess is that he would agree that there is no
stay until/unless the court grants a motion to impose a stay since Rinard
only applies to second cases--not third cases. I think he might grant such
a motion IF the debtor could show by clear and convincing evidence that the
third case was filed in good faith as to the creditor to be stayed, as must
be shown in order to satisfy the requirement of 362(c)(4)(D). But the
premise of your question assumes that the third case was a bad faith case
(and it sure sounds like it was), so I think Stella is correct that the
motion would be denied since the Debtor would not be able to produce the
necessary evidence to overcome the presumption.
Clifford Bordeaux
Bordeaux Law, P.C.
790 E. Colorado Boulevard, 9th Floor
Pasadena, CA 91101
T: 626-405-2345 / F: 626-628-1820 E: cliff@bordeauxlaw.com
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Havkin Stella wrote:
>
>
> No.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Nov 27, 2013 10:50 AM
> To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> Subject: [cdcbaa] ZURZOLO QUESTION re Automatic Stay.....
>
> Dear Members:
>
> Does Judge Zurzolo hear motions confirming stay on shortened noticed when
> its a bad faith filer.... Debtor's 3 case, filed motion to impose stay but
> not as to a creditor who wants to proceed with lawsuit in non-bk forum, and
> motion granted with respect to only those creditors who were served with
> the motion.... and the creditor was not listed as a creditor even though
> lawsuit has been pending for quite sometime...
>
> Thanks for your replies.
>
> R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
> OFF: (818) 734-7223
> CEL: (818) 554-9922
>
>
>
Zurzolo follows Rinard as to second cases under 362(c)(3)--he does not think it is necessary to continue the stay as to property of the estate in such cases. However, in a third case, my guess is that he would agree that there is no stay until/unless the court grants a motion to impose a stay since Rinard only applies to second casesuld show by clear and convincing evidence that the third case was filed in good faith as to the creditor to be stayed, as must be shown in order to satisfy the requirement of 362(c)(4)(D). But the premise of your question assumes that the third case was a bad faith case (and it sure sounds like it was), so I think Stella is correct that the motion would be denied since the Debtor would not be able to produce the necessary evidence to overcome the presumption.
Clifford BordeauxBordeaux Law, P.C.790 E. Colorado Boulevard, 9th FloorPasadena, CA 91101T: 626-405-2345 / F: 626-628-1820 E:uxlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Thanks Stella.
Hope you are well and I want to wish you and your family a very happy
holiday season. If you need anything feel free to give me a call or email
me.
R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
OFF: (818) 734-7223
CEL: (818) 554-9922
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
business hours.
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To comply with requirements imposed by the
Department of the Treasury, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not
intended or written by the practitioner to be used, and that it cannot be
used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
that may be imposed on the taxpayer, and (ii) supporting the
promotion or marketing of any transactions or matters addressed herein.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Havkin Stella wrote:
>
>
> No.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Nov 27, 2013 10:50 AM
> To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> Subject: [cdcbaa] ZURZOLO QUESTION re Automatic Stay.....
>
> Dear Members:
>
> Does Judge Zurzolo hear motions confirming stay on shortened noticed when
> its a bad faith filer.... Debtor's 3 case, filed motion to impose stay but
> not as to a creditor who wants to proceed with lawsuit in non-bk forum, and
> motion granted with respect to only those creditors who were served with
> the motion.... and the creditor was not listed as a creditor even though
> lawsuit has been pending for quite sometime...
>
> Thanks for your replies.
>
> R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
> OFF: (818) 734-7223
> CEL: (818) 554-9922
>
>
>
Thanks Stella.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.