Cavanaugh v. Davis

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 3, 2017
DocketCUMcv-17-0113
StatusUnpublished

This text of Cavanaugh v. Davis (Cavanaugh v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cavanaugh v. Davis, (Me. Super. Ct. 2017).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, SS CIVIL ACTION Docket No. PORSC-CV-17-0llS

JOHN CAVANAUGH ) ) Plaintiff ) S\/.\i ~: OF :/,-':J, i ~~ = ) Cu:nbe:-lai'~(.J. :": ~ r.~!::):--~: ·s c;f1;c e

v. ) ) VALERIE DAVIS and ) WICCAGOOD WELLNESS, LLC ) ) Defendants )

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO TERMINATE STAY

Plaintiff John Cavanaugh has filed a Supplement to Suggestion of Bankruptcy and

Motion to Terminate Stay Order As It Applies to Plaintiffs Complaint. The Motion seeks to

modify the May 1, 2017 Stay Order to allow Plaintiff to pursue the claim in his Complaint, while

maintaining the stay as to Defendant's Counterclaim. Defendant opposes the Motion. The court

elects to decide the Motion without hearing.

The question raised by the Motion to Terminate is whether Plaintiff has standing to

pursue the claims against Defendant set forth in his Complaint. The weight of authority appears

to be that, although a chapter 7 bankruptcy debtor lacks standing to pursue pre-petition claims

against third parties, a chapter 13 bankruptcy debtor has concurrent standing with the bankruptcy

trustee to pursue claims against third parties. See, e.g., Bennett v. Flagstar Bank, 2011 U.S.

Dist. LEXIS 141066 *4-7, 2011 WL 6152940; Chaput v. Scafidi, 2017 V.I. LEXIS 87 (V.I.

Super. Ct., St. Croix Div.); West v. Young, 38 Misc. 3d 1030, 1033-36 (N.Y. Supr., Westch. Cty.

2013).

Because a chapter 13 debtor's standing to pursue claims against third parties is

concurrent with that of the trustee, as long as the chapter 13 trustee is not pursuing Plaintiffs

claim against Defendant, then the Plaintiff may pursue the claims here. The present record is silent on the trustee's intention regarding the Plaintiff's claims against Defendant, so this court

will defer acting on the Motion to Terminate until the trustee's position on pursuing Plaintiff's

claims against Defendant is made a matter of record in this case. Either party may make a

supplemental filing within 30 days of this order. If no such filing is received, the Motion to

Terminate will be dismissed after 30 days.

Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 79(a), the Clerk is hereby directed to incorporate this Order by

reference in the docket.

Dated July 3, 2017 dtt~~ A. M. Horton, Justice DYLAN BOYD, ESQ SHEILAH MCLAUGHLIN, ESQ LAW OFFICES OF DYLAN BOYD LAW OFFICE OF SHEILA MCLAUGHLIN 6 CITY CENTER SUITE 301 124 MAINE STREET SUITE 216 BRUNSWICK, ME 04011 PORTLAND, ME 04101

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

West v. Young
38 Misc. 3d 1030 (New York Supreme Court, 2013)
Chaput v. Scafidi
66 V.I. 160 (Superior Court of The Virgin Islands, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cavanaugh v. Davis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cavanaugh-v-davis-mesuperct-2017.