Cody v. Micale, 7:19-mc-00004

Linda Rene Cody filed a Chapter 13 petition on Jan. 11, 2019 to stop Roanoke City's tax-sale of her condemned property; this was at least her fourth bankruptcy filing related to the same property.
The City had condemned the property in Nov. 2015 and sought tax-sale remedies after Cody failed to pay real-estate taxes since 2013, owing at least $8,158.77.
Prior filings by Cody had interrupted prior tax-sales; the July 17, 2018 bankruptcy dismissal imposed a 180-day bar on refiling, which had not fully expired when she filed again on Jan. 11, 2019.
The bankruptcy court held an evidentiary hearing, found Cody ineligible under 11 U.S.C. §109 for failing to complete required prepetition credit counseling, found the filing in bad faith/abusive, and concluded there was no reasonable prospect of confirming a Chapter 13 plan.
The bankruptcy court dismissed Cody’s Jan. 2019 petition as final. Cody then filed in this court seeking leave to appeal the dismissal and appointment of counsel for the appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Cody needed district-court leave to appeal the bankruptcy dismissal	Cody sought leave to appeal the bankruptcy court’s dismissal	The City argued dismissal was final so no leave required	Dismissal was final; leave not required; motion for leave denied
Whether district court should appoint counsel for Cody on appeal	Cody requested appointed counsel, citing disability (75% deaf)	City argued no statutory right to counsel in bankruptcy appeals and Cody had not shown indigence or exceptional circumstances	Appointment denied; no statutory right and no exceptional circumstances shown
Whether Cody was eligible to be a debtor under §109 due to prepetition counseling requirement	Cody completed counseling only after filing	City asserted failure to complete mandatory prepetition counseling made her ineligible	Court affirmed dismissal for ineligibility under §109 (failure to obtain counseling prepetition)
Whether dismissal was warranted for bad faith/abuse of bankruptcy process	Cody argued to halt the sale and pursue bankruptcy relief	City argued serial filings were intended to frustrate tax-sale and violated prior dismissal order	Court found filings in bad faith/abusive and dismissed case on that basis

Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 135 S. Ct. 1686 (2015) (dismissal of a bankruptcy case is a final order)
Watson v. 332 B.R. 740 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2005) (failure to meet §109 counseling requirement can mandate dismissal)
Eilerston v. 211 B.R. 526 (D.S.C. 1997) (no statutory right to appointed counsel for debtor on bankruptcy appeal; appointment under §1915(d) is discretionary and exceptional)
Thomas v. Grisb, 556 B.R. 714 (D. Md. 2016) (distinguishing final and interlocutory bankruptcy orders for appealability)