514 F. App'x 810
10th Cir.2013Background
- Kline filed an adversary proceeding in the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico seeking damages under 11 U.S.C. § 362(k) for willful stay violations.
- The bankruptcy court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants; the BAP affirmed.
- Kline appeals, contending the stay violations were willful and that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not bar challenges to a state foreclosure judgment.
- The court held the defendants committed only a technical stay violation and that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine applied to bar attacks on the state foreclosure judgment.
- The panel reviews de novo the bankruptcy court’s legal rulings and affirms for substantially the reasons given by the BAP and the bankruptcy court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants’ actions constituted a willful stay violation | Kline (Kline) argues the stay violation was willful | Deutsche Bank argues only a technical violation occurred | No; violation not willful |
| Whether Rooker-Feldman bars Kline’s challenge to the state foreclosure judgment | Kline contends doctrine does not bar review | Deutsche Bank asserts Rooker-Feldman bars attacks | Yes; barred by Rooker-Feldman |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Borgman, 698 F.3d 1255 (10th Cir. 2012) (legal standard for reviewing BAP decisions and de novo review of law)
- Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (U.S. 1923) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine origin)
- D.C. Cir. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1983) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine applicability)
- Miller v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. (In re Miller), 666 F.3d 1255 (10th Cir. 2012) (application of Rooker-Feldman de novo)