Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

I agree with Michael's analysis. The lien carries through and can be
exercised. Hence the need for the 522f motion. Move to reopen the case if
you want to file the 522f.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Mark J. Markus wrote:
> **
>
>
> There are two main reasons I asked. One, I'm unsure of how judicial
> foreclosures work, but I recall a component of them is a money judgment,
> which would be in appropriate obviously for a discharged debt.
>
> Second, I had someone else point out that the existence of the lien is
> based on there being an enforceable judgment (or in the absence of that, a
> security agreement, such as in the case of a mortgage). Once a debt is
> discharged in bankruptcy, it is no longer an enforceable judgment, so does
> the lien really survive? (and if so, what would the reason be for ever
> needing to file a 522f motion)?
>
> *************************
> 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)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California Board of
> Legal Specialization
>
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means
> at
> http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/
> )
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office
> of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for
> the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any
> disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is
> prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
> the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
> communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written 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 in this communication.
> On 10/27/2013 12:37 AM, Michael Avanesian wrote:
>
> Please remember I am also a "newbie" so make of this opinion what you
> will. I believe that the personal liability of the debtor is erased but the
> liability of the property for that debt is not. In other words, no in
> personam liability for the debt but in rem liability continues to exist
> after the bk. I don't see anything in the discharge injunction preventing
> in rem claims from being exercised.
>
> How much can they get out of it? I.e. suppose on the petition date there
> was enough equity for 10k of the 50k judgment to be "secured" but that
> since the petition date, the property has appreciated such that there is
> enough equity to cover the full 50k plus interest, penalties, fees, etc.
> How much can they get? I don't know. I feel like the answer should be the
> amount owed on the judgment on the petition date and nothing more.
>
> Sincerely,
> Michael Avanesian
>
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Mark J. Markus wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> A "newbie" asked me this and I wasn't sure of the answer, so figured I'd
>> post:
>>
>> If a creditor has a recorded judgment lien against property owned by a
>> debtor, and that debtor files bankruptcy and receives a discharge, as we
>> all know the debt is discharged and the lien survives (assuming no 522(f)
>> motion is filed and prevailed on).
>>
>> Under these facts, can said creditor seek to do a judicial foreclosure
>> post discharge, or would that violate 524?
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> ******************************************
>> 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)
>> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist- The State Bar of California Board of
>> Legal Specialization
>> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means
>> at
>> http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/
>> )
>> ________________________________________________
>> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office
>> of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for
>> the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any
>> disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is
>> prohibited.
>> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed
>> by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
>> communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written 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 in this communication.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
I agree with Michael's analysis. The lien carries through and can be exercised. Hence the need for the 522f motion. Move to reopen the case if you want to file the 522f.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Mark J. Markus <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Please remember I am also a "newbie" so make of this opinion what you will.
I believe that the personal liability of the debtor is erased but the
liability of the property for that debt is not. In other words, no in
personam liability for the debt but in rem liability continues to exist
after the bk. I don't see anything in the discharge injunction preventing
in rem claims from being exercised.
How much can they get out of it? I.e. suppose on the petition date there
was enough equity for 10k of the 50k judgment to be "secured" but that
since the petition date, the property has appreciated such that there is
enough equity to cover the full 50k plus interest, penalties, fees, etc.
How much can they get? I don't know. I feel like the answer should be the
amount owed on the judgment on the petition date and nothing more.
Sincerely,
Michael Avanesian
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Mark J. Markus wrote:
> **
>
>
> A "newbie" asked me this and I wasn't sure of the answer, so figured I'd
> post:
>
> If a creditor has a recorded judgment lien against property owned by a
> debtor, and that debtor files bankruptcy and receives a discharge, as we
> all know the debt is discharged and the lien survives (assuming no 522(f)
> motion is filed and prevailed on).
>
> Under these facts, can said creditor seek to do a judicial foreclosure
> post discharge, or would that violate 524?
>
>
> --
>
> ******************************************
> 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)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist- The State Bar of California Board of
> Legal Specialization
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means
> at
> http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/
> )
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office
> of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for
> the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any
> disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is
> prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
> the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
> communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written 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 in this communication.
>
>
>
>
Please remember I am also a "newbie" so make of this opinion what you will. I believe that the personal liability of the debtor is erased but the liability of the property for that debt is not. In other words, no in personam liability for the debt but in rem liability continues to exist after the bk. I don't see anything in the discharge injunction preventing in rem claims from being exercised.
How much can they get out of it? I.e. suppose on the petition date there was enough equity for 10k of the 50k judgment to be "secured" but that since the petition date, the property has appreciated such that there is enough equity to cover the full 50k plus interest, penalties, fees, etc. How much can they get? I don't know. I feel like the answer should be the amount owed on the judgment on the petition date and nothing more.
Sincerely, Michael AvanesianOn Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Mark J. Markus <bklawr@yahoo.com> wrote:
A "newbie" asked me this and I wasn't sure of the answer, so figured
I'd post:

If a creditor has a recorded
judgment lien against property owned by a debtor, and that
debtor files bankruptcy and receives a discharge, as we all know
the debt is discharged and the lien survives (assuming no 522(f)
motion is filed and prevailed on).

Under these facts, can said creditor seek to do a judicial
foreclosure post discharge, or would that violate 524?




--


******************************************
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)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist-
The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what
this means at
http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/)

The post was migrated from Yahoo.