Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

IN RE LEWIS, 14-41924. (2016)

Court: United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California Number: inbco20160603974 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 02, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM REGARDING ORDER GRANTING TRUSTEE'S CROSS-MOTION THAT THE EXCESS FORECLOSURE SALE PROCEEDS ARE PROPERTY OF THE BANKRUPTCY ESTATE WHICH WERE NOT ABANDONED BY THE ESTATE WILLIAM J. LAFFERTY, III , Bankruptcy Judge . On May 25, 2016, the Court held a hearing on Debtor's Motion for Proceeds (doc. 76) (the "Motion") and the Chapter 7 Trustee's Cross-Motion Seeking Determination that Excess Proceeds are Property of the Estate Which Have Not Been Abandoned (doc. 83) (the "Cross-Motio
More

MEMORANDUM REGARDING ORDER GRANTING TRUSTEE'S CROSS-MOTION THAT THE EXCESS FORECLOSURE SALE PROCEEDS ARE PROPERTY OF THE BANKRUPTCY ESTATE WHICH WERE NOT ABANDONED BY THE ESTATE

On May 25, 2016, the Court held a hearing on Debtor's Motion for Proceeds (doc. 76) (the "Motion") and the Chapter 7 Trustee's Cross-Motion Seeking Determination that Excess Proceeds are Property of the Estate Which Have Not Been Abandoned (doc. 83) (the "Cross-Motion"). Appearances were stated on the record. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court denied Debtor's Motion and granted the Trustee's Cross-Motion for all of the reasons stated on the record.

The Court instructed counsel for the Trustee to provide Debtor an opportunity to review the form of proposed order for approval prior to the order being entered. The Court's request to the Trustee was for the benefit of Debtor in making sure that Debtor agreed with the language in the proposed order prior to it being entered on the Court's docket. The Court is informed and believes that counsel for the Chapter 7 Trustee appropriately complied with the Court's request by sending a copy of the proposed order to Debtor for his review. Counsel for the Trustee informs the Court that Debtor did not approve the proposed order and instead replied to the Trustee's correspondence with the handwritten note attached to this Memorandum as Exhibit 1.

Having considered the proposed order in conjunction with Debtor's handwritten comment, the Court will, concurrently hereto, enter the proposed order for the following reasons:

1. The proposed order appropriately and accurately reflects the Court's ruling after the hearing on May 25, 2016. 2. The handwritten statement from Debtor was not a principled objection to the language in the Trustee's proposed order. 3. The Court is neither denying nor hindering Debtor's right to appeal by entering the proposed order.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer