Legalist DIP GP, LLC and PDG Prestige, Inc. v. Michael Dixson, et al.

Legalist DIP · United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division · February 2, 2026 · No. 23-03004-cgb

Summary

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas granted summary judgment to FSLRO 510 South Telshor Las Cruces, LLC and LPC Retail, LLC in an adversary proceeding arising from the post-confirmation sale of bankruptcy estate property. The court held that the purchase and sale agreement and subsequent transfer did not violate the automatic stay, were not avoidable under 11 U.S.C. § 549, and did not require a separate sale motion because the confirmed chapter 11 plan authorized the sale. The court also held that the request to revoke the confirmation order was untimely under 11 U.S.C. § 1144.

Court
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division
Jurisdiction
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division
Decision date
February 2, 2026
Docket number
23-03004-cgb
Disposition
other

Questions Presented

  1. Whether execution of the purchase and sale agreement or transfer of Lot 1A violated the automatic stay.
  2. Whether the purchase and sale agreement or subsequent transfer was avoidable under 11 U.S.C. § 549.
  3. Whether a separate sale motion under 11 U.S.C. § 363 was required for the sale of Lot 1A.
  4. Whether the plaintiffs' request to revoke the chapter 11 confirmation order was timely under 11 U.S.C. § 1144.
  5. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiffs' claims.

Holdings

  1. The purchase and sale agreement and subsequent transfer of Lot 1A did not violate the automatic stay because the property had revested in the reorganized debtor after confirmation and was no longer property of the bankruptcy estate when transferred.
  2. The plaintiffs could not avoid the transaction under 11 U.S.C. § 549 because execution of the purchase and sale agreement was not itself a transfer of Lot 1A, and the later transfer occurred after confirmation when Lot 1A was no longer estate property and the confirmed plan expressly authorized the sale.
  3. A separate sale motion under 11 U.S.C. § 363 was not required because the confirmed chapter 11 plan expressly authorized the sale of Lot 1A, and the property had revested in the reorganized debtor after confirmation.
  4. The plaintiffs' request to revoke the confirmation order was untimely because it was filed more than 180 days after entry of the confirmation order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…