Smith v. Jordan

356 B.R. 651, 2006 WL 2925214
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia
DecidedJune 13, 2006
Docket19-30241
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 356 B.R. 651 (Smith v. Jordan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith v. Jordan, 356 B.R. 651, 2006 WL 2925214 (Va. 2006).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DAVID H. ADAMS, Bankruptcy Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Chapter 7 trustee’s Complaint to Revoke the Debtor’s Discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(3). The Complaint is based on the debtor’s failure to obey a Court order directing that she cooperate with the trustee in the administration of the case. The trustee alleges that the debtor refinanced her home without approval of the Court, thereby eliminating any non-exempt exposed equity in the property and preventing the trustee from using said equity for the benefit of the bankruptcy estate. The debtor admits she refinanced her home, but states it was after she received her discharge and was therefore not in violation of the Court order. She further argues that the trustee never objected to her valuation of her house or her liquidation analysis and made no claim to the equity in the debtor’s home. The Court must decide whether its Order directing the debtor to cooperate *653 with the trustee was in effect after the debtor received her discharge and, if so, whether the debtor failed to cooperate with the trustee. This is a core proceeding over which this Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(b)(2) and 1334(b). Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. After taking the matter under advisement, we make the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The facts in this case are not in dispute. On January 7, 2005, the debtor filed a petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. On January 13, 2005, an Administrative Order was entered and sent to the debtor, which states, inter alia, that the debtor will preserve estate property and cooperate with the trustee. 1 The § 341 Meeting of Creditors was held on February 17, 2005. On June 24, 2005, the trustee requested that the Clerk of Court send out a notice to all creditors that there may be assets available for distribution in the case and on that same day the debtor received her discharge.

On November 28, 2005, the trustee filed a Motion to Sell Debtor’s Real Property, *654 which sale would produce approximately $5,000 for distribution to the creditors after taking into consideration the debtor’s homestead exemption and payment of the first and second mortgages, a judgment lien and the trustee’s commission. The debtor responded to the motion on December 15, 2005, stating that subsequent to receiving her discharge she refinanced her home and that the new mortgage of $231,000.00 surpassed the offer of purchase previously submitted to the trustee in the amount of $227,000.00. At the hearing on the Motion to Sell held February 14, 2006, the trustee withdrew the motion as a result of the debtor’s refinancing.

On February 28, 2006, the trustee filed the instant adversary proceeding to revoke the debtor’s discharge based upon her refinancing of her home, an action he believed to violate the January 13, 2005 order.

On April 25, 2006, the Initial Pre-trial Conference was held and both parties stated there were no facts in dispute and wished to proceed by the submission of simultaneous briefs.

ARGUMENTS

The trustee argues that the debtor had no right to refinance her home, thereby eliminating the non-exempt, exposed equity in the property, as the home was still property of the estate despite the fact that she had received her discharge. He argues that he had not abandoned the property and that the debtor failed to obtain the necessary permission of the Court to refinance the property. The trustee argues that the debtor violated an order of the Court forbidding such action and should therefore have her discharge revoked.

The debtor argues that upon her discharge she believed that the trustee no longer had any rights to her home and thought she was free to deal with the property as she thought proper. Similarly, she denies that she was required to seek approval of the Court before refinancing her existing loan since she had received her discharge. Finally, the debtor argues that no provision of the January 13, 2005 order precludes her from refinancing her home, therefore she did not disobey a Court order and should retain her discharge.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Upon commencement of a bankruptcy ease all of the debtor’s property becomes property of the estate. See 11 U.S.C. § 541(a) (2005). In a Chapter 7 case, the estate property, unless exempt, remains in the estate until it is administered or abandoned by the trustee. See 11 U.S.C. §§ 522 (exemptions), 554 (abandonment) and 726 (distribution). Because the issue at hand is abandonment, the other two issues will not be addressed.

A. Abandonment

Abandonment “ ‘constitutes a waiver of a trustee’s interest’ ” in estate property. Guttman v. CitiCapital Commercial Corp. (In re Furley’s Transport, Inc.), 306 B.R. 514, 522 (D.Md.2002) (quoting Jones v. Star Bank, South Cent. Ohio, 142 B.R. 194, 198 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1992)). Section 554 of the Code describes when, how and why abandonment occurs; it states:

(a) After notice and a hearing, the trustee may abandon any property of the estate that is burdensome to the estate or that is of inconsequential value and benefit to the estate.
(b) On request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, the court may order the trustee to abandon any property of the estate that is burden *655 some to the estate or that is of inconsequential value and benefit to the estate.
(c) Unless the court orders otherwise, any property scheduled under section 521(1) of this title [11 USCS § 521(1) ] not otherwise administered at the time of the closing of a case is abandoned to the debtor and administered for purposes of section 350 of this title [11 USCS § 350],
(d) Unless the court orders otherwise, property of the estate that is not abandoned under this section and that is not administered in the case remains property of the estate.

11 U.S.C. § 554 (2005).

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

Related

Smith v. Jordan (In Re Jordan)
521 F.3d 430 (Fourth Circuit, 2008)
Marcus v. Jeffries
356 B.R. 661 (E.D. Virginia, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
356 B.R. 651, 2006 WL 2925214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-jordan-vaeb-2006.