.jpg)
Third Filer and Trustee Sale in 2 Business Days
Not correct in third filing.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
Specialization.
Mark T.Jessee
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 10:17 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Third Filer and Trustee Sale in 2 Business Days
The stay still applies to the estate in rem even if the stay does not apply
to the debtor in personam. I struggle with distinction in Chapter 13,
because the Chapter 13 trustee is really not administering the estate.
Thought off the top of my head: File a Chapter 7 where it is clear that the
estate has a representative to assert standing in rem for the stay to
continue and then convert to Chapter 13 if it appears debtor is eligible and
a plan is feasible.
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
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION,DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE
NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Fri 25/06/10 9:46 PM , "Cameron Totten" tottenlaw@sbcglobal.net sent:
Ive filed several bk petitions on the day before trustees sales. The
reality is that they were always taken off and it was weeks before the
lender got around to hire a lawyer to file a motion for relief from stay and
analyze whether a stay was actually in place. Thus, in my admittedly
limited experience, the sale never goes forward as long as you provide the
trustee with a copy of the bk petition.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
If sale trustee has a good lawyer, the sale will go forward if no stay ordered after notice and a hearing.
Dennis McGoldrick
350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
Torrance, CA 90503
On Jun 25, 2010, at 9:46 PM, "Cameron Totten" wrote:
Ive filed several bk petitions on the day before trustees sales. The reality is that they were always taken off and it was weeks before the lender got around to hire a lawyer to file a motion for relief from stay and analyze whether a stay was actually in place. Thus, in my admittedly limited experience, the sale never goes forward as long as you provide the trustee with a copy of the bk petition.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
362(c)(4) says no stay at all in third case. In rem stay vs in personum stay only applies to 2nd case
Dennis McGoldrick
350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
Torrance, CA 90503
On Jun 25, 2010, at 10:16 PM, Mark T.Jessee wrote:
The stay still applies to the estate in rem even if the stay does not apply to the debtor in personam. I struggle with distinction in Chapter 13, because the Chapter 13 trustee is really not administering the estate. Thought off the top of my head: File a Chapter 7 where it is clear that the estate has a representative to assert standing in rem for the stay to continue and then convert to Chapter 13 if it appears debtor is eligible and a plan is feasible.
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
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION,DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Fri 25/06/10 9:46 PM , "Cameron Totten" tottenlaw@sbcglobal.net sent:
Ive filed several bk petitions on the day before trustees sales. The reality is that they were always taken off and it was weeks before the lender got around to hire a lawyer to file a motion for relief from stay and analyze whether a stay was actually in place. Thus, in my admittedly limited experience, the sale never goes forward as long as you provide the trustee with a copy of the bk petition.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
The stay still applies to the estate in rem even if the stay does not
apply to the debtor in personam. I struggle with distinction in
Chapter 13, because the Chapter 13 trustee is really not administering
the estate. Thought off the top of my head: File a Chapter 7 where
it is clear that the estate has a representative to assert standing in
rem for the stay to continue and then convert to Chapter 13 if it
appears debtor is eligible and a plan is feasible.
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
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE
PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE,
DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
PLEASE NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Fri 25/06/10 9:46 PM , "Cameron Totten" tottenlaw@sbcglobal.net
sent:
Ive filed several bk petitions on the day before trustees
sales. The reality is that they were always taken off and it was
weeks before the lender got around to hire a lawyer to file a motion
for relief from stay and analyze whether a stay was actually in place.
Thus, in my admittedly limited experience, the sale never goes
forward as long as you provide the trustee with a copy of the bk
petition.
FROM: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] ON
BEHALF OF Giovanni Orantes
SENT: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:09 PM
TO: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
SUBJECT: Re: [cdcbaa] Third Filer and Trustee Sale in 2 Business
Days
Thank you for the suggestion. I'll explore the option.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Jacob Chang wrote:
I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning.
Great thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint
filed and tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that
notice could not be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing
on Monday. Explain that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer
irreparable harm. If the court denys motion for lack of notice of ex
parte motion, then immediately before 10 AM give notice of ex parte
motion to defendants for Tuesday morning to stop the sale. I've been
able to get a number of tro's granted on the day of the sale. The
closest was 15 minutes before the sale. I probably lost a lot of hair
that day. If granted, you at least have enough time to do the motion
to set aside dismissal with OST.
Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel: (213) 252-4440
Fax: (213) 738-1116
Email: jacobchang.esq@gmail.com [2]
Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only
by certain individuals. It may contain information that is
attorney-client privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it
has been misdirected, or if you suspect you have received this in
error, please notify me by replying and then delete both the message
and reply. Thank you.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
Colleagues:
I got a new client who was previously represented by a different
attorney in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was
dismissed because the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time.
The second one was dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a
506 Motion in a Judge Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that
it was dismissed because the client didn't make 2 plan payments. The
client had, in fact, made the two plan payments and had proof of it.
The attorney refunded the client the attorney's fees. However, the
debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th. We filed yesterday a
motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the second case and
explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a sale is
impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments
which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an
OST; however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the
order that the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing.
However, this would be a third filing, which means that there is no
automatic stay until an order imposing it is granted and only
prospectively. So, we basically would need an order entered on Monday
or on Tuesday before the time of the sale.
Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an
ost for a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does
anyone have any suggestions?
--
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com [4]
website: www.gobklaw.com [5]
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN
BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail at
(213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
--
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com [6]
website: www.gobklaw.com [7]
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN
BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail at
(213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
Links:
[1] mailto:jacobchang.esq@gmail.com
[2] mailto:jacobchang.esq@gmail.com
[3] mailto:go@gobklaw.com
[4] mailto:go@gobklaw.com
[5] http://www.gobklaw.com
[6] mailto:go@gobklaw.com
[7] http://www.gobklaw.com
[8] mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com?subjectRE: [cdcbaa] Third Filer
and Trustee Sale in 2 Business Days
[9]
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I've filed several bk petitions on the day before trustee's sales. The
reality is that they were always taken off and it was weeks before the
lender got around to hire a lawyer to file a motion for relief from stay and
analyze whether a stay was actually in place. Thus, in my admittedly
limited experience, the sale never goes forward as long as you provide the
trustee with a copy of the bk petition.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Watch out which court you go to--some judge will not do it. If it is downtown LA, forget it. Your strongest argument is lender violated the California non judicial statutory procedures---this you need an affidavit from homeowner.
Paul Horn, ESQ., CPA
Attorney at Law
Certified Public Accountant
1045 E. Valley Blvd., Suite A215
San Gabriel, CA 91770
626-695-7310
877-872-9997--fax
www.paulhornlawfirm.com
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, June 25, 2010 9:09:15 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Third Filer and Trustee Sale in 2 Business Days
Thank you for the suggestion. I'll explore the option.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Jacob Chang wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
>>
>
>>
>
>I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning. Great thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint filed and tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that notice could not be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing on Monday. Explain that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer irreparable harm. If the court denys motion for lack of notice of ex parte motion, then immediately before 10 AM give notice of ex parte motion to defendants for Tuesday morning to stop the sale. I've been able to get a number of tro's granted on the day of the sale. The closest was 15 minutes before the sale. I probably lost a lot of hair that day. If granted, you at least have enough time to do the motion to set aside dismissal with OST.
>>
>Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
>Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
>1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
>Los Angeles, CA 90017
>Tel: (213) 252-4440
>Fax: (213) 738-1116
>Email: jacobchang.esq@ gmail.com
>
>Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>Colleagues:
>>
>>
>>I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th. We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST; however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order
that the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the sale.
>>
>>
>>Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost for a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have any suggestions?
>>
>>--
>>Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
>>3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
>>Los Angeles, CA 90010
>>Tel: (213) 389-4362
>>Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
>>Fax: (877) 789-5776
>>e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
>>>>
>>
>>
>>website: www.gobklaw. com
>>
>>WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>>
>>SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
>>
>>Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail >>
>>IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
>>
>>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw. com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
Watch out which court you go to--some judge will not do it. If it is downtown LA, forget it. Your strongest argument is lender violated the California non judicial statutory procedures---this you need an affidavit from homeowner. Paul Horn, ESQ., CPA Attorney at LawCertified Public Accountant1045 E. Valley Blvd., Suite A215San Gabriel, CA 91770626-695-7310877-872-9997--fax www.paulhornlawfirm.comFrom: Giovanni Orantes <go@gobklaw.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Fri, June 25, 2010 9:09:15 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Third Filer and Trustee Sale in 2 Business Days
Thank you for the suggestion. I'll explore the option.On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Jacob Chang <jacobchang.esq@ gmail.com> wrote:
I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning. Great thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint filed and tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that notice could not be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing on Monday. Explain that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer irreparable harm. If the court denys motion for lack of notice of ex parte motion, then immediately before 10 AM give notice of ex parte motion to defendants for Tuesday morning to stop the sale. I've been able to get a number of tro's granted on the day of the sale. The closest was 15 minutes before the sale. I probably lost a lot of hair that day. If granted, you at least have enough time to do the motion to set aside dismissal with OST.
Jacob D. Chang, Esq.Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third FloorLos Angeles, CA 90017Tel: (213) 252-4440Fax: (213) 738-1116Email: jacobchang.esq@ gmail.com
Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Giovanni Orantes <go@gobklaw.com> wrote:
Colleagues:I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th. We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST;
however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order that the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the sale.
Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost for a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have any suggestions?-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw. comWE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq. Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Thank you for the suggestion. I'll explore the option.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Jacob Chang wrote:
>
>
> I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning. Great
> thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint filed and
> tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that notice could not
> be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing on Monday. Explain
> that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer irreparable harm. If the
> court denys motion for lack of notice of ex parte motion, then immediately
> before 10 AM give notice of ex parte motion to defendants for Tuesday
> morning to stop the sale. I've been able to get a number of tro's granted
> on the day of the sale. The closest was 15 minutes before the sale. I
> probably lost a lot of hair that day. If granted, you at least have enough
> time to do the motion to set aside dismissal with OST.
>
> Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
> Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
> 1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
> Los Angeles, CA 90017
> Tel: (213) 252-4440
> Fax: (213) 738-1116
> Email: jacobchang.esq@gmail.com
>
> Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
> Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by
> certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client
> privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected,
> or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by
> replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Colleagues:
>>
>> I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney
>> in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because
>> the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was
>> dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge
>> Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the
>> client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two
>> plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the
>> attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th.
>> We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the
>> second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a
>> sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments
>> which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST;
>> however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order that
>> the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this
>> would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until
>> an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically
>> would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the
>> sale.
>>
>> Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost
>> for a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have
>> any suggestions?
>>
>> --
>> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
>> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
>> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
>> Los Angeles, CA 90010
>> Tel: (213) 389-4362
>> Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
>> Fax: (877) 789-5776
>> e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
>> website: www.gobklaw.com
>>
>> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>>
>> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
>> AND SANTA BARBARA.
>>
>> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
>> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
>> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
>> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
>> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
>> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
>> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
>> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>>
>> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
>>
>>
>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
Thank you for the suggestion. I'll explore the option.On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Jacob Chang
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning. Great
thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint filed and
tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that notice could not
be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing on Monday. Explain
that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer irreparable harm. If the
court denys motion for lack of notice of ex parte motion, then immediately
before 10 AM give notice of ex parte motion to defendants for Tuesday
morning to stop the sale. I've been able to get a number of tro's granted
on the day of the sale. The closest was 15 minutes before the sale. I
probably lost a lot of hair that day. If granted, you at least have enough
time to do the motion to set aside dismissal with OST.
Jacob D. Chang, Esq.
Law Offices of Jacob D. Chang
1600 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel: (213) 252-4440
Fax: (213) 738-1116
Email: jacobchang.esq@gmail.com
Please kindly consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
Note: This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by
certain individuals. It may contain information that is attorney-client
privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected,
or if you suspect you have received this in error, please notify me by
replying and then delete both the message and reply. Thank you.
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
>
>
> Colleagues:
>
> I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney
> in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because
> the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was
> dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge
> Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the
> client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two
> plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the
> attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th.
> We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the
> second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a
> sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments
> which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST;
> however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order that
> the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this
> would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until
> an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically
> would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the
> sale.
>
> Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost for
> a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> --
> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
> Tel: (213) 389-4362
> Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
> Fax: (877) 789-5776
> e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
> website: www.gobklaw.com
>
> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>
> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
> AND SANTA BARBARA.
>
> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
>
>
>
I have an idea. File a civil suit and seek a TRO monday morning. Great thing about LA superior court is that you can get the complaint filed and tro granted on the same day. Explain in declaration that notice could not be given by today (Friday) 10:00 AM, for the hearing on Monday. Explain that if the sale occurs, your clients will suffer irreparable harm. If the court denys motion for lack of notice of ex parte motion, then immediately before 10 AM give notice of ex parte motion to defendants for Tuesday
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Colleagues:
I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney in
the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because the
attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was
dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge
Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the
client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two
plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the
attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th.
We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the
second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a
sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments
which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST;
however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order that
the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this
would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until
an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically
would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the
sale.
Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost for
a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have any
suggestions?
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.
Colleagues:I got a new client who was previously represented by a different attorney in the filing of two chapter 13 cases. The first one was dismissed because the attorney did not file a Chapter 13 plan on time. The second one was dismissed apparently because the attorney filed a 506 Motion in a Judge Zurzolo case, but he claimed to the client that it was dismissed because the client didn't make 2 plan payments. The client had, in fact, made the two plan payments and had proof of it. The attorney refunded the client the attorney's fees. However, the debtor's house is up for sale on June 29th. We filed yesterday a motion to vacate or reconsider the dismissal of the second case and explained that two previous petitions had been filed, that a sale is impending and attached proof of all the plan and mortgage payments which shows that dismissal is unfair along with an application for an OST; however, Judge Zurzolo denied the App. for OST and added to the order that the dismissal order had nothing preventing another filing. However, this would be a third filing, which means that there is no automatic stay until an order imposing it is granted and only prospectively. So, we basically would need an order entered on Monday or on Tuesday before the time of the sale.
Other than filing the third petition along with another app. for an ost for a hearing to impose the stay and praying for the best, does anyone have any suggestions?-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.comWE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with 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.