In Re Martinez Ortiz

306 B.R. 727, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 323, 2004 WL 583631
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico
DecidedMarch 23, 2004
Docket16-07809
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 306 B.R. 727 (In Re Martinez Ortiz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Martinez Ortiz, 306 B.R. 727, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 323, 2004 WL 583631 (prb 2004).

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER

ENRIQUE S. LAMOUTTE, Bankruptcy Judge.

The question before the court is whether a property, which was foreclosed prepetition, is property of the estate within the scope of the provisions of section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code, and applicable Puer-to Rico law. For the reasons set forth *729 below, we find that the foreclosed property is property of the estate.

Factual and Procedural Background

On April 19, 2000, the debtor, Maria del Carmen Martinez Ortiz, executed a Mortgage Note in favor of Champion Mortgage Corporation as collateral to a loan in the amount of $21,900.00 plus 12% interest rate. The mortgage note was recorded in the Registry of Property, Caguas Section, where the real property owned by Ms. Martinez is located, to duly secure the loan extended by Champion Mortgage Corporation. Ms. Martinez defaulted on the loan on February 1, 2002. On July 16, 2002, R & G Mortgage Corporation (“R & G”) filed an ordinary foreclosure action before the state court. 1 Judgment by Stipulation was notified on November 21, 2002. On April 7, 2003, the state court issued the Order for Execution of Judgment and Judicial Sale, and on April 14, 2003, the Clerk of the Court issued the Warrant for Execution. The public auction was held on August 4, 2003. The foreclosed realty was adjudicated to Mr. Augusto Brandes Blan-co in the amount of $36,100.00, and said amount was deposited with the court on August 4, 2003. The marshal filed the record of the public auction on August 4, 2003. On August 11, 2003, R & G filed a motion requesting the withdrawal of funds. Ms. Martinez requested the stay of the state court proceedings on August 19, 2003, based on the filing of her petition for relief filed on August 15, 2003. The state court granted R & G withdrawal request, but stayed the order based on debtor’s motion to stay the proceeding, as per Order notified on September 2, 2003. The state court entered Judgment ordering the filing of the proceeding without prejudice based on the filing of Ms. Martinez’ bankruptcy petition. The Judgment was notified on September 3, 2003. R & G filed a second request to withdraw the funds in the state court proceeding, on September 29, 2003, and the same was denied based on the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Said Order was notified on November 24, 2003. The above findings are based on the certified copies of the state court record provided by Ms. Martinez.

Ms. Martinez filed for relief under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code on August 15, 2003. The debtor included in her schedules the foreclosed property, and secured creditor R & G. The debtor also requested an exemption on said property. The schedules and statement of financial affairs were filed on August 15, 2003, and were later amended on October 9, 2003 (Docket entry No. 8), to include the information related to the foreclosure proceeding filed before the state court. An Amended Chapter 13 Plan was also filed on October 9, 2003 (Docket entry No. 7). The October 9, 2003 plan provides that payment of arrears to R & G would be made through the trustee, and current payments to be made directly by debtor to R & G. The confirmation hearing was held on November 5, 2003 but it was continued without a date pending the filing of the parties’ legal memorandums addressing the issue of whether the debtor’s property, which was foreclosed prepetition, is property of the estate. The parties filed their legal memoranda, and the court took the matter under advisement.

Applicable Law and Discussion

The issue before the court is whether a property foreclosed prepetition is property *730 of the estate within the scope of the provisions of section 541 of the Bankruptcy-Code, and applicable Puerto Rico law.

Section 541(a) of the Bankruptcy Code governs what comprises property of the estate. 2 See Tidewater Finance Company v. Moffett (In re Moffett), 356 F.3d 518 (4th Cir.2004). This provision is subject to the exceptions enumerated in section 541(b) of the Code. “However, nothing in this section 541 can revest debtor with property lost prepetition, such as through foreclosure and eviction.” 5 Lawrence P. King, Collier On Bankruptcy ¶ 541.04 (15th Edition Revised 2003). When considering “the debtor’s interests in real property it is necessary to look outside of bankruptcy law to determine the nature and extent of such interests.” Collier ¶ 541.05. See also Moffett, supra; Boyd v. U.S./FmHA (In the Matter of Boyd), 11 F.3d 59 (5th Cir.1994). Section 541(d) provides whether or not a property is property of the estate when the debtor only has bare legal title on the property and lacks any equitable interest. 3 To determine whether debtor’s foreclosed property is property of the estate, or the nature of debtor’s interest in said property, if any, we must examine the applicable statutory provisions of Puerto Rico law.

The Puerto Rico Civil Code, Title 31 of the Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated (31 L.P.R.A.), governs the property rights acquired by the purchaser of a real property under a sale contract. In a private sale governed by the Puerto Rico Civil Code provisions, the seller may file a collection of moneys action, in the event of default. In the event that a mortgage was created to secure the loan, then the Puerto Rico Mortgage Law, which provides other collection alternatives, may be applicable.

The Puerto Rico Mortgage Law, 30 L.P.R.A., governs the procedure to create a mortgage to secure a loan on a real property, and the procedure to foreclose the mortgage when the purchaser defaults on the terms and provisions of the mortgage note. Rules 51.3 4 and 51.8 of the Puerto Rico Rules of Civil Procedure, 32 L.P.R.A. Ap. Ill, R. 51, set forth the procedural requirements for the execution of judgment in a foreclosure action, that is, the notice of sale; the public auction; the judicial sale, and the execution of the certificate of sale. Strict compliance of these *731 procedural requirements is of the essence in order to determine when and how the legal title is indeed transferred to the best bidder in a foreclosure action under the Puerto Rico Mortgage Law.

In Puerto Rico, a property may be foreclosed either through a summary statutory proceeding or an ordinary statutory proceeding. 30 L.P.R.A. §§ 2701 et seq. Generally, the ordinary foreclosure proceeding is preferred by counsel, insofar as the summary proceeding requirements are more strict. One of the most notable differences between both proceedings is that, in a summary foreclosure proceeding, the judicial sale is subject to the confirmation of the court, while in the ordinary proceeding it is not. See 30 L.P.R.A. §§ 2701 et seq.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
306 B.R. 727, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 323, 2004 WL 583631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-martinez-ortiz-prb-2004.