Damick v. City of Geneva
151 A.D.3d 1839
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Charles F. Damick, Jr. owned property subject to an in rem tax foreclosure; the City of Geneva obtained a default judgment and a tax deed conveying title.
- Damick had a pending bankruptcy case that began January 13, 2014; the tax foreclosure deadline to answer or redeem had four days remaining when the bankruptcy commenced.
- Damick argued the bankruptcy extended his time to answer or redeem, thus the foreclosure default entered September 18, 2014 was premature.
- The bankruptcy case and its automatic stay were dismissed on September 12, 2014.
- Supreme Court (Ontario County) dismissed Damick’s action to vacate the foreclosure judgment and deed; Damick appealed.
- The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding the relevant bankruptcy tolling provision did not extend Damick’s time and that, under 11 U.S.C. § 108(b), his deadline expired September 16, 2014.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Damick's pending bankruptcy extended the time to answer or redeem in the separate tax foreclosure proceeding, rendering the default judgment premature | Section 108(c) of the Bankruptcy Code extended Damick’s time to answer/redeem because of the bankruptcy filing | Section 108(c) does not apply; § 108(b) controls and only tolled the deadline to the later of the original period or 60 days after the order of relief—here the deadline expired shortly after dismissal of the stay | Court held § 108(c) does not extend time in separate non-bankruptcy proceedings; § 108(b) governed and Damick’s time expired on Sept. 16, 2014, so the default was not premature |
Key Cases Cited
- Husmann v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 169 F.3d 1151 (explaining § 108(c) applies to commencing or continuing civil actions against the debtor in nonbankruptcy courts)
- Rogers v. Corrosion Prods., Inc., 42 F.3d 292 (same; limits of § 108(c) discussed)
- Aslanidis v. United States Lines, Inc., 7 F.3d 1067 (interpretation of § 108(c) in nonbankruptcy actions)
- Eagle-Picher Indus., Inc. v. United States, 937 F.2d 625 (discussing interplay of bankruptcy stay and deadlines)
- Weiner v. Sprint Mtge. Bankers Corp., 235 A.D.2d 472 (applying § 108(b) to toll deadlines for debtors/trustees)
- In re Flores, 55 B.R. 210 (Bankr. D.N.J.) (application of § 108(b) timing rules)