Aja v. Emigrant Funding Corp. (In Re Aja), 442 B.R. 857

Debtor Dora L. Aja, as Hamilton Street Realty, LLC's manager, transferred title of the Williams Street Property to herself on December 8, 2009 for nominal consideration, just before a foreclosure and the filing of this case.
Emigrant Funding Corporation loaned $400,000 to Hamilton, secured by a mortgage on the Williams Street Property.
Hamilton filed three Chapter 11 petitions between 2007 and 2009; all were dismissed for failures to comply with debtor-in-possession duties and related requirements.
On the same day as the transfer and filing, Emigrant sought in rem relief from stay with respect to the Williams Street Property, arguing lack of equity, bad faith, and management issues.
The bankruptcy court found no equity in the Williams Street Property and no viable plan in prospect, and granted in rem relief from stay, which the Debtor appealed.
The Panel dismissed the appeal for lack of standing, explaining that a Chapter 7 debtor generally lacks standing to pursue such appeals.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing to appeal by a Chapter 7 debtor	Aja argues she has standing as the debtor to appeal.	Emigrant argues only the trustee may prosecute estate appeals.	Debtor lacks standing; appeal dismissed
Equity and viability for reorganization	Debtor contends there is equity or a viable plan in prospect.	Emigrant argues there is no equity and no viable reorganization.	No equity; no viable plan established
Appropriateness of in rem stay relief	Debtor challenges the basis for in rem relief.	Emigrant asserts cause exists for relief due to lack of equity and management issues.	In rem relief granted; stayed-related relief appropriate
Curtis factors applicability	Debtor relies on Curtis factors for stay modification.	Curtis is inapplicable to this context.	Curtis not applicable
Alleged bias and procedural issues	Debtor alleges bias and procedural missteps by the bankruptcy court.	Emigrant denies bias and argues no procedural error affected decision.	Claims not addressed on merits; standing governs

In re Curtis, 40 B.R. 795 (Bankr. D. Utah 1984) (Curtis factors inapplicable to stay relief here)
In re Graves, 212 B.R. 692 (1st Cir. BAP 1997) (burden of equity and necessity for reorganization in stay analysis)
In re Kehoe, 221 B.R. 285 (1st Cir. BAP 1998) (standing of trustee; exceptions for debtor's discharge impact)
In re El San Juan Hotel, 809 F.2d 151 (1st Cir. 1987) (debtor generally has no interest in estate distribution pre-discharge)
In re Goodwin's Discount Furniture, Inc., 16 B.R. 887 (1st Cir. BAP 1982) (same principle on debtor's interest and disposition of estate)
In re J & M Salupo Dev. Co., Inc., 388 B.R. 809 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2008) (no reorganization in a Chapter 7 context; property liquidation)
In re Gonzalez-Ruiz, 341 B.R. 371 (1st Cir. BAP 2006) (in rem relief as appropriate when multiple petitions are filed to invoke stay)
In re Soares, 107 F.3d 969 (1st Cir. 1997) (abuse of discretion standard and related considerations)
In re Aguiar, 311 B.R. 129 (1st Cir. BAP 2004) (standard for relief from stay and related review)