Reswick v. Reswick (In Re Reswick)
446 B.R. 362
| 9th Cir. BAP | 2011Background
- Debtor filed Chapter 13 on March 23, 2009; case dismissed for non-payment on June 29, 2009.
- Debtor filed a second Chapter 13 on August 25, 2009 within one year of the prior dismissal.
- Section 362(c)(3)(A) terminated the stay on the 30th day after the second petition date unless extended; no extension motion was filed, so stay ended September 24, 2009.
- Ex-spouse Garnishment initiated October 2, 2009 post-petition to collect a 2008 judgment.
- Debtor sought damages under 11 U.S.C. § 362(k)(1) claiming the stay was violated; bankruptcy court denied, determining stay terminated entirely.
- Panel affirmed, adopting the minority view that the stay terminated in its entirety.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of §362(c)(3)(A) termination | Reswick argues termination is debtor-only | Reswick contends termination is in entirety | Termination in entirety |
| Legislative history supports complete termination | Reswick argues history shows partial termination or ambiguity | Reswick argues history supports narrow reading | History supports complete termination |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Daniel, 404 B.R. 318 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.2009) (central to interpreting scope of 362(c)(3)(A))
- In re Jupiter, 344 B.R. 754 (Bankr.D.S.C.2006) (reads 362(c)(3) in context; supports interpretation)
- Holcomb v. Hardeman, 380 B.R. 813 (Bankr.N.D.Okla.2008) (majority view that termination is debtor/property-limited)
- In re Jumpp, 356 B.R. 789 (Bankr.D.R.I.2006) (partial termination reading in majority view)
- In re Curry, 362 B.R. 394 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.2007) (legislative history guiding interpretation)
- Nelson v. George Wong Pension Trust (In re Nelson), 391 B.R. 437 (9th Cir. BAP 2008) (discusses c(4) contrast; supports deterrence rationale)