Grandy v. Sanders (In Re Smith)

336 B.R. 402, 55 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 907, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 134, 2006 WL 146621
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Illinois
DecidedJanuary 10, 2006
Docket19-30133
StatusPublished

This text of 336 B.R. 402 (Grandy v. Sanders (In Re Smith)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Grandy v. Sanders (In Re Smith), 336 B.R. 402, 55 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 907, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 134, 2006 WL 146621 (Ill. 2006).

Opinion

OPINION

GERALD D. FINES, Bankruptcy Judge.

This matter having come before the Court on a Complaint filed by the Trustee seeking to avoid the transfer of certain real estate by the Debtor, Charles J. Smith, to Defendant, Robert J. Sanders, as an unauthorized post-petition transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 549, or, in the alternative, as an avoidable preference pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547(b); the Court, having reviewed the written memoranda of the parties and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 7052 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.

*403 Findings of Fact

The parties in this matter have agreed that the material facts are not in dispute and they are, in pertinent part as follows:

1. On August 20, 2003, the Defendant loaned the Debtor the sum of $10,000.

2. On November 3, 2003, the Debtor drafted and signed a document indicating that he owed the Defendant the sum of $30,000, and that, as collateral for the loan, he would give a deed to the Defendant to a tract of real estate which he owned. The document further indicated that the Debt- or intended to pay the debt to the Defendant from the sale of “other property,” and the document further indicated that, if that sale did not go through, the Debtor intended for the Defendant to have title to a piece of property which the document described as “Property in Rear 66 x 158 Ft. & Pole Barn.” Although the November 3, 2003, document indicated that the Debtor intended to give the Defendant a “deed” to the property being used as collateral, there is no evidence that any type of deed was executed in conjunction with the November 3, 2003, document.

3. On November 4, 2003, the Defendant loaned the Debtor an additional sum of $20,000, bringing the debt to a total sum of $30,000, as described in the November 3, 2003, document.

4. Although it is not clear from the facts supplied by the parties to the Court, it is apparent that the Debtor either was unable to sell the “other property” mentioned in the November 3, 2003, document, or he did not attempt to sell that property to generate the necessary funds to retire the $30,000 debt to the Defendant. Instead, on September 8, 2004, the Debtor executed a quit claim deed in favor of the Defendant, Robert J. Sanders, for property described as:

A 66 foot by 153 foot strip of property, being part of the right of way of the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company, located in the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of Section 26, Township 6 North, Range 10 West of the Third Principal Meridian, Madison County, Illinois.

5. Sometime between September 8, 2004, and September 10, 2004, the above-described quit claim deed was delivered to the Office of the Recorder of Deeds for Madison County, Illinois, for the purpose of having the quit claim deed officially recorded. The September 8, 2004, quit claim deed was not recorded, but was, instead, returned to the Defendant with a faxed copy to the Defendant’s lawyer on September 10, 2004, together with a document from the Office of Debra D. Ming, Madison County Chief County Assessment Official, entitled “Deed Correction Cover Sheet,” which indicated that the legal description on the quit claim deed was in error in that it was incomplete and needed more information before being recorded.

6. On September 10, 2004, in response to the returned quit claim deed and deed correction cover sheet, the Defendant’s attorney contacted First American Title Insurance Company by fax and applied for a title insurance policy for the purpose of determining the correct and complete legal description of the subject real estate.

7. On or about October 20, 2004, the Defendant’s attorney was advised by a fax from First American Title Insurance Company to use the legal description on a tract search that First American had prepared in response to the Defendant’s attorney’s request of September 10, 2004. Apparently, no further action was taken in this matter until January 7, 2005, when the Debtor signed a quit claim deed containing the legal description supplied by First American Title Insurance Company. The January 7, 2005, quit claim deed was thereafter officially recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Madison County, on January 18, 2005.

*404 8. On January 13, 2005, just six days after he signed the January 7, 2005, quit claim deed and five days before the official recording of said deed, the Debtor filed for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtor did not schedule the real estate described in the January 7, 2005, quit claim deed as an asset, nor did he schedule the Defendant as a creditor. The Debtor did, however, note, on line 10 of his Statement of Financial Affairs, a transfer to Robert Sanders bearing the date of September 1, 2004, of property described as “Parcel ID# 24-1-01-26-01-107-017.003, formerly right of way 5405 Godfrey Road, Godfrey, Illinois, 62035.” The description of this transfer contains no other detail, even though line 10 of the Statement of Financial Affairs calls for the address of the transferee and the value received for the transfer.

9. On June 17, 2005, Laura Grandy, the duly appointed Trustee in Debtor’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding filed the instant adversary complaint seeking to have the transfer of real estate from the Debtor to the Defendant, as evidenced by the January 7, 2005, quit claim deed, avoided as either an unauthorized post-petition transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 549, or, in the alternative, as a preferential transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547.

Conclusions of Law

The key issue in this matter concerns the effective date of the filing of a quit claim deed in favor of Defendant, Robert J. Sanders. The Defendant asserts that the effective date must be found to be September 8, 2004, when the first quit claim deed was executed by the Debtor and filed with the Office of the Recorder of Madison County, for the purpose of being recorded. In support of this position, the Defendant cites the case of Cook v. Hall, 6 Ill. 575, 1844 WL 4113 (S.Ct.1844), in which it was held that a deed takes effect from the time of filing it for record and not from the time it was actually recorded. The Defendant further cites the case of In re APC Construction, Inc., 132 B.R. 690 (D.Vt.1991), standing for a proposition that perfection of a statutory lien relates back to the date that the notice of the lien was filed. In reviewing these cases, the Court finds that they are not applicable to the present situation.

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

Related

Cook v. Hall
6 Ill. 575 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1844)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
336 B.R. 402, 55 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 907, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 134, 2006 WL 146621, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grandy-v-sanders-in-re-smith-ilsb-2006.