Bank of America, N.A. v. David Francis Miller, III
This text of Bank of America, N.A. v. David Francis Miller, III (Bank of America, N.A. v. David Francis Miller, III) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 14-13503 Date Filed: 10/07/2015 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ___________________________
No. 14-13503 Non-Argument Calendar ___________________________
Docket Nos. 1:14-cv-01377-AT; 13-bkc-77194-BBM
In re: DAVID FRANCIS MILLER, III,
Debtor, __________________________________________________________________
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DAVID FRANCIS MILLER, III,
Defendant-Appellee.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _______________________________
(October 7, 2015) Case: 14-13503 Date Filed: 10/07/2015 Page: 2 of 2
Before MARCUS, WILLIAM PRYOR, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
In this appeal, Bank of America, N.A. challenges the district court’s
summary affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s order voiding a wholly unsecured
second priority lien on residential property owned by a Chapter 7 debtor. We kept
the appeal in abeyance pending review by the Supreme Court of our decisions in
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Caulkett (In re Caulkett), 566 F. App’x 879 (11th Cir. 2014),
and in Bank of Am., N.A. v. Toledo-Cardona (In re Toledo-Cardona), 556 F.
App’x 911 (11th Cir. 2014).
Because the Supreme Court has now disposed of these cases in Bank of
America v. Caulkett, 135 S.Ct. 1995 (2015), we grant Bank of America’s motion
to lift the stay of this appeal.
In the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Caulkett and this Court’s
decision in Waits v. Bank of Am., N.A. (In re Waits), 793 F.3d 1267 (11th Cir.
2015), we deny Bank of America’s motion for summary reversal, vacate the
district court’s judgment, and remand for further proceedings consistent with
Caulkett.
VACATED AND REMANDED. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bank of America, N.A. v. David Francis Miller, III, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-america-na-v-david-francis-miller-iii-ca11-2015.