  |
  |
  |
    
  
   |
 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
I. FIRST CIRCUIT
The central issue in Jumpp was whether § 362(c)(3)(A) terminated the automatic stay with respect to the debtor, property of the debtor and property of the estate, in instances where a debtor previously filed a bankruptcy case within the preceding year. After recognizing the existing split in authority and applying well-established principles of statutory construction, the BAP adopted the majority perspective that the automatic stay does not terminate with respect to property of the estate.
In Baldarsarro, the New Hampshire bankruptcy court weighs, for the first time since BAPCPA became effective, a contested motion to extend the automatic stay filed by a debtor. The Courtıs analysis in parsing and applying § 362(c)(3)(A) is extremely thorough. This is a great case to consult for the requisite elements to overcome a debtorıs burden with respect to a Motion to Extend the Stay.
In re Debra A. Murphy, 346 B.R. 79 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006)
In a Chapter 13 case, the creditor requested a prospective determination that the subsequent confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan would not bind the creditor. Section 362(j), a new section added by BAPCPA in 2005, allows any party in interest to request a confirmatory order that the automatic stay has been terminated under 11 USC 362(c). The issue was whether the bankruptcy court could, in connection with the creditors § 362(j) request, make a determination that the determination that the creditor would not be bound by a subsequent confirmation of a Ch. 13 plan. The bankruptcy court limited the sectionıs application to confirming the termination of the automatic stay, stating that the section did not authorize it to make determinations as to other facts or relief and was strictly limited to orders confirming the termination of the automatic stay.
The debtors filed a Chapter 13 petition, but failed to obtain the prepetition credit counseling required under BAPCPA, § 109(h). The UST argued that this rendered them ineligible as debtors and that the case should be dismissed under 1307(c). The debtors
