Stay of UD Action in Bankruptcy Questions
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:11 am
The UD action is against the former owner of the property who currently
resides on the property and rents rooms to tenants. There is no current UD
judgment.
It is the tenant who seeks to file bankruptcy to stop the UD action from
proceeding and there are other issues that would warrant the UD continuing,
but that is not relevant for this question.
So, we have no judgment for possession and we have a lessee who has not
filed a preliminary claim of right of possession and who is listed as a
"Doe" on the UD action because they likely did not know about the room
renting situation at the time the UD action was filed.
I am now back in Margaret's camp that this tenant is not a party to the UD
action though she may "occupy" or "live" in the house, but it doesn't seem
that filing a bankruptcy case for her would stop this UD action.
Thanks again for the insights and input.
Christine
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Mark T. Jessee wrote:
> In Re Tiffany Butler is old law. BAPCPA includes Section 362(b)(22) which
> negates the holding in Butler.
>
>
>
> Mark T. Jessee
> Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
> "A Debt Relief Agency"
> 50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
> Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
> (805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:24:35 -0800, Christine Wilton attorneychristine@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ******
> [Attachment(s)from Christine Wilton included below]
>
> I just found In re Butler, which shows that the Stay does apply. I'll be
> filing the case.
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> Christine Wilton
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Margaret Norman > wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Without filing a preliminary claim of right of possession, the tenant's
>> name would not be involved in the UD action. I don't see how the Bk stay
>> would stall the eviction in that case. Does your client want to add their
>> name to an eviction? They will have to move eventually and many owners of
>> property may rent to someone with a bk but not anybody involved in an
>> eviction. ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Margaret Norman, Attny****
>>
>> 111 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #355****
>>
>> Manhattan Beach, Ca. 90266****
>>
>> 310-376-7873 ****
>>
>> Fax 310-798-0846 ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
>> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Christine Wilton
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:58 AM
>> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Stay of UD Action in Bankruptcy Questions****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Hello Colleagues:
>>
>> I have a pc who is a tenant occupying a property where the owner is
>> defending a UD action. I understand the tenant has NOT filled out a
>> preliminary claim of right of possession to the property and may not be a
>> part of the UD action, though the action states "all occupants."
>>
>> Would a bankruptcy filing for the tenant, stay the UD action?
>>
>>
>> I need your thoughts and input on this please.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Christine A. Wilton
>> Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
>> 4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
>> Lakewood, CA 90712
>> Office: 877-631-2220
>> Cell: 562-824-7563
>> Fax: 1-636-212-7078
>> Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
>> Web: www.attorneychristine.com
>> Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
>> ***************************
>> Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including
>> attachments, is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and
>> may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
>> review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone
>> other than the intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any
>> ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may
>> apply to this communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
>> message.
>>
>> Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice
>> contained in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to
>> and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax
>> penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has
>> been affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
>> ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ****
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Christine A. Wilton
> Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
> 4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
> Lakewood, CA 90712
> Office: 877-631-2220
> Cell: 562-824-7563
> Fax: 1-636-212-7078
> Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
> Web: www.attorneychristine.com
> Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
> ***************************
> Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
> is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
> intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
> PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
> communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
> Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
> in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
> be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
> be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
> to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
>
>
Christine A. Wilton
Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
Lakewood, CA 90712
Office: 877-631-2220
Cell: 562-824-7563
Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
Web: www.attorneychristine.com
Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
***************************
Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
The UD action is against the former owner of the property who currently resides on the property and rents rooms to tenants. There is no current UD judgment.It is the tenant who seeks to file bankruptcy to stop the UD action from proceeding and there are other issues that would warrant the UD continuing, but that is not relevant for this question.
So, we have no judgment for possession and we have a lessee who has not filed a preliminary claim of right of possession and who is listed as a "Doe" on the UD action because they likely did not know about the room renting situation at the time the UD action was filed.
I am now back in Margaret's camp that this tenant is not a party to the UD action though she may "occupy" or "live" in the house, but it doesn't seem that filing a bankruptcy case for her would stop this UD action.
Thanks again for the insights and input.ChristineOn Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Mark T. Jessee <mjessee@jesseelaw.com> wrote:
In Re Tiffany Butler is old law.
BAPCPA includes Section 362(b)(22) which negates the holding in Butler.
Mark T. JesseeLaw Offices of Mark T. Jessee"A Debt Relief
Agency"50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200Thousand Oaks, CA 91360(805)
497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)On Tue, 24 Jan 2012
18:24:35 -0800, Christine Wilton <attorneychristine@gmail.com>
wrote:
[
The post was migrated from Yahoo.