Summary
The United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Lorenzo Luciano Lopez’s Chapter 13 case and related filing restrictions. The court held that a debtor’s right to dismissal under 11 U.S.C. § 1307(b), although generally absolute, is not necessarily immediate or unconditional, and that the bankruptcy court could conduct a hearing and rule on a pending automatic-stay-relief motion before entering the dismissal order. The court also concluded that the bankruptcy court adequately supported its findings of bad faith under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7052.
Holdings
- Although § 1307(b) gives an eligible chapter 13 debtor an absolute right to dismissal, the dismissal need not be entered immediately or unconditionally.
- The bankruptcy court did not err by conducting a hearing or delaying entry of the dismissal order to rule on the pending motion for relief from the automatic stay.
- The 180-day filing restriction was required by 11 U.S.C. § 109(g)(2) because Lopez requested and obtained voluntary dismissal after a request for relief from the automatic stay had been filed.
- The bankruptcy court's findings and explanation were sufficient under Rule 7052.
Questions Presented
- Whether a chapter 13 debtor's motion for voluntary dismissal under 11 U.S.C. § 1307(b) requires immediate and unconditional dismissal.
- Whether the bankruptcy court may conduct a hearing and delay entry of a dismissal order to decide a pending motion for relief from the automatic stay.
- Whether the bankruptcy court erred by imposing a 180-day restriction on refiling under 11 U.S.C. § 109(g)(2).
- Whether the bankruptcy court's findings and explanation satisfied Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7052.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (24)
- Hutchinson v. Hahn, 402 F. App'x 391, 394-95 (10th Cir. 2010)(followed)
- St. Louis Baptist Temple, Inc. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 605 F.2d 1169, 1172 (10th Cir. 1979)(followed)
- In re Shattuck, 411 B.R. 378, 382 (10th Cir. BAP 2009)(followed)
- Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 144 F.3d 664, 679 (10th Cir. 1998)(followed)
- In re Taylor, 737 F.3d 670, 674-75 (10th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- In re Robinson, No. UT-02-043, 2003 WL 1442465, at *4 (10th Cir. BAP Mar. 21, 2003)(followed)
- In re Barbieri, 199 F.3d 616, 619-22 (2d Cir. 1999)(followed)
- In re Smith, 999 F.3d 452 (6th Cir. 2021)(followed)
- In re Nichols, 10 F.4th 956 (9th Cir. 2021)(followed)
- In re Rebeor, 89 B.R. 314, 322 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 1988)(discussed)
Showing top 10 of 24.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.