Pam Dubov v. Sandra Ann Read
692 F.3d 1185
11th Cir.2012Background
- Debtor Read filed Chapter 11; Tax Collector and Property Appraiser seek to limit ad valorem tax redetermination by state-law time bar.
- Florida 60-day challenge deadline ran December 13, 2009 after tax roll certification on Oct 12, 2009.
- Debtor filed bankruptcy Nov 10, 2009; Tax Collector file proof of claim Dec 15, 2009.
- Debtor’s objection to Tax Claims was April 21, 2010, well after state-law deadline.
- Bankruptcy court held the §505(a)(2)(C) modifier extended tax redetermination time; district court affirmed.
- Court now holds §505(a)(2)(C) creates an exception to §108(a) time limits and the bankruptcy court erred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §505(a)(2)(C) creates an exception to §108(a) time limits. | Read argues §108(a) extension applies, so objection timely. | Tax Collector/Property Appraiser argue §505(a)(2)(C) controls and bars after state-law deadline. | Yes; §505(a)(2)(C) prevails, creating an exception to §108(a). |
| Whether the Debtor’s objection was timely under §505(a)(2)(C) given state-law expiration. | Debtor contends timing extended by §108(a). | Read contends expiration under nonbankruptcy law bars redetermination. | No; expiration under nonbankruptcy law precludes redetermination; §108(a) cannot override. |
| How §108(a) and §505(a)(2)(C) interact in the context of ad valorem taxes. | Debtor seeks to synchronize filing with §108(a) extension. | Statutory scheme places priority on §505(a)(2)(C) to protect creditors. | §505(a)(2)(C) specific provisions prevail over §108(a)’s general extension. |
| Whether the bankruptcy court’s ruling should be upheld given the statutory interpretation. | Bankruptcy court believed extension applied. | Court should follow Oakwell/Folks and similar holdings. | Reversed; remand to vacate bankruptcy order. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Village at Oakwell Farms, Ltd., 428 B.R. 372 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2010) (time to contest tax limits bankruptcy relief when state-period expired)
- In re Breakwater Shores Partners, L.P., 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 1454 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 2012) (bankruptcy court must act before state-period expiration (Lexis cites))
- In re ATA Airlines, Inc., 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 3571 (Bankr. S.D. Ind. 2010) (§505(a)(2)(C) bars redetermination after nonbankruptcy period)
- In re Globe Mfg. Corp., 567 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (de novo review standard; statutory interpretation guidance)
- In re Galvano, 116 B.R. 367 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1990) (§505 purpose to protect creditors; finality of tax determinations)
- In re Tennyson, 611 F.3d 873 (11th Cir. 2010) (BPACPA goal to ensure debtors repay creditors; §505(a)(2)(C) context)
- TRW Inc. v. Andrews, 534 U.S. 19 (1990) (statutory interpretation principle: give effect to specific terms over general)