Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

Either way works. LBR 5010-1 expressly allows it either way. I always
file them concurrently because it makes the motion to reopen easier (e.g.,
you can refer to the avoidance motion).
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:39 PM Shannon Doyle
sdoyle@ebankruptcyassistants.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Can you file a motion to avoid lien simultaneously with the motion to
> reopen case or do you have to wait for the order reopening case?
>
>
>
> [image: Description: Description: New Professional Pic2]
>
> Shannon A. Doyle
>
> *Attorney | Virtual Bankruptcy Assistant*
>
> *Direct Line: 855-378-4080*
>
> *Direct Fax: 562-249-8435*
>
> *Licensed in California*
>
>
>
>
>
null
Either way works. LBR 5010-1 expressly allows it either way. I always file them concurrently because it makes the motion to reopen easier (e.g., you can refer to the avoidance motion).On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:39 PM Shannon Doyle sdoyle@ebankruptcyassistants.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Can you file a motion to avoid lien simultaneously with the motion to reopen case or do you have to wait for the order reopening case?
Shannon A. Doyle
Attorney | Virtual Bankruptcy Assistant
Direct Line: 855-378-4080
Direct Fax: 562-249-8435
Licensed in California
-- null
X-Attachment-Id: 1648c02521c4cd34f0f1
X-Attachment-Id: 1648c02521c4cd34f0f1

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

You need to wait for the order to reopen case first.
Best regards,
Nancy Korompis
tion (including any attachments) is intended for use by the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you.
On Wednesday, July 11, 2018, 2:39:05 PM PDT, Shannon Doyle sdoyle@ebankruptcyassistants.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
Can you file a motion to avoid lien simultaneously with the motion to reopen case or do you have to wait for the order reopening case?
Shannon A. Doyle
Attorney | Virtual Bankruptcy Assistant
Direct Line: 855-378-4080
Direct Fax: 562-249-8435
Licensed in California
You need to wait for the order to reopen case first.Best regards, Nancy Korompis
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Must wait.
Steven B. Lever

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Yes put $100.00.
Sent from Stella Havkin's iPhone
> On Jul 5, 2017, at 10:57 AM, 'Desiree Causey 714-372-2225' causeylaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> I have asked to file a Motion to Avoid Lien on a 4 year old closed Chapter 7. I have reviewed the exemption and note that the exemption for the house was listed as $0 as the house was underwater at the time. Do I need to amend Schedule C prior to filing to Motion to Avoid. If so, what is the preferred language in this situation.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> Desiree Causey, Esq.
>
> Law Office of Desiree Causey
>
> 7755 Center Avenue, Suite 1100
>
> Huntington Beach, CA 92647
>
>
>
> 714-372-2225 (phone)
>
> 714-908-7646 (same fax number)
>
>
>
> Privileged And Confidential Communication.
> This electronic transmission, and any documents attached hereto, (a) are protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 USC 2510-2521), (b) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information, and (c) are for the sole use of the intended recipient named above. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify the sender and delete the electronic message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I have asked to file a Motion to Avoid Lien on a 4 year old closed Chapter
7. I have reviewed the exemption and note that the exemption for the house
was listed as $0 as the house was underwater at the time. Do I need to
amend Schedule C prior to filing to Motion to Avoid. If so, what is the
preferred language in this situation.
Thanks!
Desiree Causey, Esq.
Law Office of Desiree Causey
7755 Center Avenue, Suite 1100
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
714-372-2225 (phone)
714-908-7646 (same fax number)
Privileged And Confidential Communication.
This electronic transmission, and any documents attached hereto, (a) are
protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 USC
2510-2521), (b) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information, and (c) are for the sole use of the intended recipient named
above. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify
the sender and delete the electronic message. Any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the contents of the information received in error is
strictly prohibited.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

What is a fair price to charge for a Motion to Avoid Lien for an Amex
judgment recorded against a property, but the debt was properly listed and
discharged in the BK?
Please email me privately, as I do not need the antitrust discussion.
Desiree Causey, Esq.
Law Office of Desiree Causey
17011 Beach Blvd., Suite 900
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
714-375-6663
714-908-7646 (fax)
Any tax advice contained in the body of this e-mail (and any attachments
thereto) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by the
recipient for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under
the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
Privileged And Confidential Communication.
This electronic transmission, and any documents attached hereto, (a) are
protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 USC
2510-2521), (b) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
information, and (c) are for the sole use of the intended recipient named
above. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify
the sender and delete the electronic message. Any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the contents of the information received in error is
strictly prohibited.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
What is a fair price to charge for a Motion to Avoid Lien
for an Amex judgment recorded against a property, but the debt was properly
listed and discharged in the BK?

Please email me privately, as I do not need the antitrust
discussion.


Desiree Causey, Esq.
Law Office of Desiree Causey
17011 Beach Blvd., Suite 900
Huntington Beach, CA 92647

714-375-6663
714-908-7646 (fax)

Any tax advice contained in the body of this e-mail (and any
attachments thereto) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, by the recipient for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be
imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law
provisions.
Privileged And Confidential Communication.
This electronic transmission, and any documents attached hereto, (a) are
protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 USC 2510-2521),
(b) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information, and (c) are
for the sole use of the intended recipient named above. If you have received
this electronic message in error, please notify the sender and delete the electronic
message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of the
information received in error is strictly prohibited.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.


The post was migrated from Yahoo.

May be I am missing somthing. I believe the judge denied the motion because
you simply cannot claim an exempt amount of $50,000 under CCP 703. Since the
attorney made a claim of exemption under CCP 703 (about $17,000+), the lien does
not impair the claim of exemption. The equity far exceeded the amount allowed
under CCP 703. What are your thoughts.
Joseph Ore
May be I am missing somthing. I believe the judge denied the motion because you simply cannot claim an exempt amount of $50,000 under CCP 703. Since the attorney made a claim of exemption under CCP 703 (about $17,000+), the lien does not impair the claim of exemption. The equity far exceeded the amount allowed under CCP 703. What are your thoughts.

Joseph Ore

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Thanks group for the responses.
Mark C. Kim
>
> I have to concur with Dennis. What evidence of
> value did you provide to the court? Is his home
> worth exactly $335,000 and the amount owed on the
> mortgage and all other liens and encumbrances
> (senior to the judgment lien) as of the petition
> date exactly $285,000? I somehow doubt it. You
> need one cent of impairment to qualify and the
> numbers you provided show zero. I would need more
> specifics, as Dennis mentioned, to advise further.
>
> ***********************************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173
> (818)509-1460 (fax)
> e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.com
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> ************************************************
> 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 (818)
> 509-1173 or e-mail us at bklawr@bklaw.com and
> destroy the
> original message and all copies.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 7:03 AM
> Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: motion to avoid lien
>
>
> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, "markkimlaw"
> wrote:
> > The debtor's house is valued at
> > approx. $335,000 and his mortgage is $285,000.
> We took the 703
> > homestead exemption in the amount of $50,000.
> Judge Carroll
> denied
> > the Motion stating that the lien in question
> does not impair an
> > exemption. This is my first Motion to Avoid
> Lien. Can someone
> tell
> > me why Judge Carroll denied my Motion. Also,
> any suggestions on
> how
> > I can get the lien avoided?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Mark C. Kim
>
> Two problems:
> 335 - 285 is 50. (would work)
> approx 335, might be 340, 340 - 285 is 55, 55 - 4
> is 51 (won't work)
> 704 is the exmeption for 50 k, if you took 703,
> the only exmept is
> 19k
>
> There are enough cases which say any extra equity
> and the lien does
> not impair the exemption to make EC correct. The
> motion has to be
> structured so there is no question about the
> impairment.
>
> Can't tell from what you wrote what to fix, these
> are suggestions,
> but now if you move again, you must explain the
> differences in the
> motions, so it will be harder. You need very
> specific testimony re
> value if the numbers are as close as you the math
> above shows.
>
> Usually with this small of a lien, I offer the fee
> I would charge
> for the motion to the creditor, in settlement,
> before making the
> motion. It is likely the creditor, who doesn't
> know EC, will take
> the offer, or counter with a reasonable number,
> not wanting the lien
> avoided. After losing the motion, still make an
> offer, the creditor
> may not understand refiling may be more difficult.
>
> dennis
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> email to:
> cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at (213)252-2224 and return the original message to: Law Offices of Kim & Wilhelm, 3600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1220, Los Angeles, CA 90010. This communication may contain privileged information which is not to be disseminated.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I have to concur with Dennis. What evidence of value did you provide to the court? Is his home worth exactly $335,000 and the amount owed on the mortgage and all other liens and encumbrances (senior to the judgment lien) as of the petition date exactly $285,000? I somehow doubt it. You need one cent of impairment to qualify and the numbers you provided show zero. I would need more specifics, as Dennis mentioned, to advise further.
***********************************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173
(818)509-1460 (fax)
e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.com
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
************************************************
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 (818)
509-1173 or e-mail us at bklawr@bklaw.com and destroy the
original message and all copies.
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 7:03 AM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: motion to avoid lien
--- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, "markkimlaw" wrote:
> The debtor's house is valued at
> approx. $335,000 and his mortgage is $285,000. We took the 703
> homestead exemption in the amount of $50,000. Judge Carroll
denied
> the Motion stating that the lien in question does not impair an
> exemption. This is my first Motion to Avoid Lien. Can someone
tell
> me why Judge Carroll denied my Motion. Also, any suggestions on
how
> I can get the lien avoided?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark C. Kim
Two problems:
335 - 285 is 50. (would work)
approx 335, might be 340, 340 - 285 is 55, 55 - 4 is 51 (won't work)
704 is the exmeption for 50 k, if you took 703, the only exmept is
19k
There are enough cases which say any extra equity and the lien does
not impair the exemption to make EC correct. The motion has to be
structured so there is no question about the impairment.
Can't tell from what you wrote what to fix, these are suggestions,
but now if you move again, you must explain the differences in the
motions, so it will be harder. You need very specific testimony re
value if the numbers are as close as you the math above shows.
Usually with this small of a lien, I offer the fee I would charge
for the motion to the creditor, in settlement, before making the
motion. It is likely the creditor, who doesn't know EC, will take
the offer, or counter with a reasonable number, not wanting the lien
avoided. After losing the motion, still make an offer, the creditor
may not understand refiling may be more difficult.
dennis
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

I have to concur with Dennis. What
evidence of value did you provide to the court? Is his home worth exactly
$335,000 and the amount owed on the mortgage and all other liens and
encumbrances (senior to the judgment lien) as of the petition date exactly
$285,000? I somehow doubt it. You need one cent of impairment to
qualify and the numbers you provided show zero. I would need more
specifics, as Dennis mentioned, to advise further.

***********************************************Mark J. MarkusLaw
Office of Mark J. Markus11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403Studio City, CA91604-2652(818)509-1173(818)509-1460 (fax)e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.comweb:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

> The debtor's house is valued at
> approx. $335,000 and his mortgage is $285,000. We took the 703
> homestead exemption in the amount of $50,000. Judge Carroll
denied
> the Motion stating that the lien in question does not impair an
> exemption. This is my first Motion to Avoid Lien. Can someone
tell
> me why Judge Carroll denied my Motion. Also, any suggestions on
how
> I can get the lien avoided?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark C. Kim
Two problems:
335 - 285 is 50. (would work)
approx 335, might be 340, 340 - 285 is 55, 55 - 4 is 51 (won't work)
704 is the exmeption for 50 k, if you took 703, the only exmept is
19k
There are enough cases which say any extra equity and the lien does
not impair the exemption to make EC correct. The motion has to be
structured so there is no question about the impairment.
Can't tell from what you wrote what to fix, these are suggestions,
but now if you move again, you must explain the differences in the
motions, so it will be harder. You need very specific testimony re
value if the numbers are as close as you the math above shows.
Usually with this small of a lien, I offer the fee I would charge
for the motion to the creditor, in settlement, before making the
motion. It is likely the creditor, who doesn't know EC, will take
the offer, or counter with a reasonable number, not wanting the lien
avoided. After losing the motion, still make an offer, the creditor
may not understand refiling may be more difficult.
dennis

The post was migrated from Yahoo.