In re D'Arcangelo

D. Massachusetts

In re D'Arcangelo

146 B.R. 314, 1992 WL 297501

CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts

DecidedJune 11, 1992

DocketBankruptcy No. 92-11945-CJK

StatusPublished

This text of 146 B.R. 314 (In re D'Arcangelo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re D'Arcangelo, 146 B.R. 314, 1992 WL 297501 (D. Mass. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION OF SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. FOR RELIEF FROM AUTOMATIC STAY

CAROL J. KENNER, Bankruptcy Judge.

Sears, Roebuck and Co. has moved for relief from the automatic stay to repossess certain collateral it alleges is in the Debt- or’s possession: a sofa, a recliner, and a fax machine. The Debtor responds that Sears has already repossessed the sofa and recliner and that Sears has agreed to permit the Debtor to redeem the fax machine for $225.00. The Court need not hold a hearing on this motion. Both of the Debt- or’s allegations would be defenses to repossession, but neither is a defense to a motion for relief from stay to seek repossession. If Sears does not accept the Debtor’s response but instead insists on attempting to repossess the collateral, the Debtor may interpose his defenses in state court. Therefore, a separate order will enter allowing the motion for relief from stay.

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

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION OF SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. FOR RELIEF FROM AUTOMATIC STAY

CAROL J. KENNER, Bankruptcy Judge.

Sears, Roebuck and Co. has moved for relief from the automatic stay to repossess certain collateral it alleges is in the Debt- or’s possession: a sofa, a recliner, and a fax machine. The Debtor responds that Sears has already repossessed the sofa and recliner and that Sears has agreed to permit the Debtor to redeem the fax machine for $225.00. The Court need not hold a hearing on this motion. Both of the Debt- or’s allegations would be defenses to repossession, but neither is a defense to a motion for relief from stay to seek repossession. If Sears does not accept the Debtor’s response but instead insists on attempting to repossess the collateral, the Debtor may interpose his defenses in state court. Therefore, a separate order will enter allowing the motion for relief from stay.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 B.R. 314, 1992 WL 297501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-darcangelo-mad-1992.