Kjellerup v. Bradley (In Re Bradley)

18 B.R. 280, 1982 Bankr. LEXIS 4618
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont
DecidedMarch 10, 1982
Docket19-10101
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 18 B.R. 280 (Kjellerup v. Bradley (In Re Bradley)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kjellerup v. Bradley (In Re Bradley), 18 B.R. 280, 1982 Bankr. LEXIS 4618 (Vt. 1982).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHARLES J. MARRO, Bankruptcy Judge.

The Consolidated Complaints of Robert Kjellerup and Hope Kjellerup and of the *281 Bradford National Bank against the Debtors for relief from automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code came on for hearing, after notice, with the following appearances:

From the records in the case, the testimony and exhibits received at the hearing, the following facts are established:

Vincent Michael Bradley and Lucia Fulco, husband and wife as debtors, filed a Petition for Relief under Chapter 13 on October 27, 1981. The plaintiffs, Robert Kjellerup and Hope Kjellerup, moved to dismiss their Petition on the grounds that they were not individuals with regular income as prescribed by § 109(e) of the Code. By Memorandum and Order entered February 17, 1982 this Court determined that the Debtors did in fact have regular income and denied the Motion to Dismiss.

The Plaintiffs are seeking relief from the automatic stay in order that Robert Kjeller-up and Hope Kjellerup, as mortgagees, may institute foreclosure of certain real estate owned by the Debtors. The Bradford National Bank has already commenced foreclosure of it as second mortgagee and it seeks relief from the automatic stay so that it may enforce the Decree of Foreclosure in its favor entered by the Orange Superior Court of the State of Vermont on September 28, 1981.

The Debtors did on June 8, 1978 purchase from the plaintiffs, Robert Kjellerup and Hope Kjellerup, certain real estate situated in the Town of Newbury, County of Orange, and State of Vermont, consisting of a castle-type residence known as Moore Castle and also as “Drant Mansion,” together with all of the contents in this residence, which was located on 11 acres of land more or less. The purchase price was $100,000.00 of which $15,000.00 was paid at the time of closing on June 8, 1978 and the balance of $85,000.00 was evidenced by a promissory note bearing the same date in the principal sum of $85,000.00 payable with interest at 6% in five annual installments beginning June 5, 1979. This note was secured by a first mortgage from the Debtors to Robert Kjellerup and Hope R. Kjellerup on the real estate and a security interest in all of the personal property then located in the so-called castle together with a tractor and other personal property situated outdoors and in the garage.

The Debtors made one payment of $9,000.00 on the secured note the year following the date of purchase and left a principal balance of $76,000.00 against which they made three payments each of $1,500.00 during the year 1980. The balance of principal and interest on this secured note to Robert and Hope Kjellerup as of February 11, 1982 was $84,469.32 on which there has been accruing interest at 6% of $375.03 making the balance due as of now the sum of $84,844.35.

The mortgage and security interest in favor of Robert and Hope Kjellerup have been in default since 1980.

On July 16, 1980 the Debtors d/b/a Bradley Associates executed and delivered to the Bradford National Bank a mortgage note dated July 16, 1980 in the principal sum of $112,000.00 payable quarterly with interest at 3% over the then prime rate of 11.50% beginning on the 1st of October, 1980. This note was secured by a second mortgage given by the Debtors to the Bradford National Bank on July 16, 1980 and covering the same property they purchased from Kjellerups known as the Moore Castle and Drant Mansion and also by a security interest in certain personal property as well as all other articles, furniture, furnishings, fixtures and appliances used for family, personal, or household purposes. Subsequently, the Debtors on April 27, 1981 executed and delivered to the Bradford National Bank a personal time note in the principal sum of $1,580.89 payable 90 days after date with interest at 21.88%. This note was also secured by the aforesaid real estate and personal property. The Debtors defaulted in the payment of these secured notes and, as a result, the Bank instituted foreclosure proceedings as to the mortgaged real estate and on September 28, 1981 obtained from the Orange County Superior Court an Amended Judgment of Foreclosure which provided that unless the Debtors paid to the *282 Clerk of the Court on or before March 2, 1982 for the benefit of the Bradford National Bank the sum of $134,972.29 together with interest at a per diem rate of $71.42 from August 17, 1981 they and all persons claiming under them or either of them would be foreclosed and forever barred from all equity of redemption in the premises.

To date no payment has been made to the Bradford National Bank under the Amended Judgment of Foreclosure and the balance now due under this Decree is $149,-613.89. The Amended Decree of Foreclosure has not been filed in the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Newbury, Vermont.

There are delinquent taxes of $3,726.80 for the year 1980-81 in the hands of the Tax Collector of Newbury, Vermont for collection.

Sometime prior to May 14, 1980 the Debtors made application to the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation to have the castle building designated as a historical landmark and as part of the commitment for restoration and matching funds, they did on that date make the property subject to certain covenants under a written Declaration of Covenants. These covenants were to remain in effect for five years and they do not take away from the marketability of the property.

The Debtors have listed the property with a broker for sale at a price of $285,000.00 subject to the payment of a commission of 10% upon consummation of the sale. This would produce a net of $256,500.00.

The castle building is well constructed and the Debtors have made considerable improvements to the property since they acquired it in June of 1978. The value of the entire complex consisting of the castle with land from a cost approach is $313,-060.00 and from a market approach, $233,-000.00. The personal property which is subject to the security interest in favor of the mortgagees has a market value of $19,-262.00. Therefore, for the purpose of determining any equity in the property the Court must necessarily take the fair market values of both the real estate and the personal property and those amount to $252,262.00. As against this sum the total indebtedness under both real estate mortgage and security interests, as of now, is $234,458.24. This leaves an equity cushion of approximately $18,000.00. The Court is aware that with the non-payment of taxes and of interest on the mortgages this equity will be dissipated at the expiration of about six months.

The castle premises are being adequately maintained by tenants to whom they have been rented.

Under § 362(d)(2), on request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, the court shall grant relief from the automatic stay such as by terminating, annulling, modifying or conditioning such stay with respect to a stay of an act against property, if the debtor does not have an equity in such property and such property is not necessary to an effective reorganization. In other words both conditions must exist; one, a lack of equity in the property, and two, that the property is not necessary for an effective reorganization.

From the evidence it is clear that there is equity in the property.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 B.R. 280, 1982 Bankr. LEXIS 4618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kjellerup-v-bradley-in-re-bradley-vtb-1982.