28 U.S.C. § 362
Other provisions and rules not affected
Except as expressly provided in this chapter, nothing in this chapter shall be construed to affect any other provision of this title, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, or the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1981–2014 · leading case: America's Servicing Co. v. Schwartz-Tallard (In Re Schwartz-Tallard)
America's Servicing Co. v. Schwartz-Tallard (In Re Schwartz-Tallard) (2014)
“In Sternberg, we considered the scope of “actual damages” under 28 U.S.C. § 362 (k)(1). Section 362(k)(1) 18 IN RE: SCHWARTZ-TALLARD allows “an individual injured by any willful violation of [the automatic] stay .”
In Re Orfa Corp. of Philadelphia (1994)
“The Bank first argues that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 362 (e), the automatic stay automatically expired in January, 1992 when the bankruptcy court failed to hold a preliminary hearing within thirty (30) days after the Bank had filed a request for relief from the automatic stay…”
In Re Complaint of Judicial Misconduct (2009)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 362 (b)(l)(A)(ii); Misconduct Rule 4(c)(1); Implementation of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980: A Report to the Chief Justice 146 (2006).”
Walker v. Cadle Co. (In Re Walker) (1994)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 362 (a)(5) (1993). Cadle somewhat narrowly argues that the sale was not one pursuant to a lien right but, rather, it was a sale pursuant to a belief, perhaps mistaken, that it actually owned the trailer.”
In Re Reinhardt (1997)
“28 U.S.C. § 362 (a)(2) & (3). To determine Debtor’s interest in the subject property, a review of the state court eviction procedure is appropriate.”
Jardine's Professional Collision Repair, Inc. v. Gamble (1999)
“*802 Subsection (h) was added to section 362 in 1984 in order to compensate debtors and punish parties for willful violations of the automatic stay: An individual injured by any willful violation of a stay provided by this section shall recover actual damages, including costs…”
O'Hara Corp. v. F/V NORTH STAR (1997)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 362 (a); S.Rep. No. 989, 95th Cong.”
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Swedeland Development Group, Inc. (In re Swedeland Development Group, Inc.) (1994)
“The district court also indicated that Carteret was entitled to relief from the automatic stay under 28 U.S.C. § 362 (d)(1) as it did not have adequate protection.”
Elgin National Bank v. Cowsert (In Re Cowsert) (1981)
“In this adversary proceeding plaintiff, Elgin National Bank seeks a lifting of the automatic stay of 28 U.S.C. § 362 (a) so that it may proceed to take possession of certain real property held in an Illinois land trust of which defendant-debtors are the beneficiaries.”
In Re Stone Resources, Inc. (2011)
“§ 1112 (b) and denying Appellant’s motion for relief from the automatic stay provision of the bankruptcy code pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 362 (d)(1). The issue on appeal is whether, on the facts of this case, a preliminary injunction entered prior to the filing of a petition for…”
Wachter v. Lezdey (2002)
“Thus, under Ninth Circuit precedent, the motion to dismiss can be decided without violating 28 U.S.C. § 362 (a). As we have indicated above, section 1447(d) requires dismissal of this appeal.”
Merrill Lynch Credit Corp. v. King (2000)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 362 (d)(1) ("On request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, the court shall grant relief from the stay provided under subsection (a) of this section, such as by terminating, annulling, modifying, or conditioning such stay .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.