- 9 -
Respondent reasons that, because the dismissal order never became
final, and consistent with the bankruptcy court's subsequent
decision to reinstate petitioner's bankruptcy case, the automatic
stay remained in effect at all times. In the alternative,
respondent contends that the bankruptcy court's February 12, 1997
order reinstating petitioner's case caused the automatic stay to
be reinstated on that date.
Contrary to respondent's position, we conclude that the
bankruptcy court's January 21, 1997, order of dismissal
terminated the automatic stay. Under the circumstances, we are
not satisfied that petitioner's motion for reconsideration
precluded the bankruptcy court's order of dismissal from becoming
final insofar as that order served to terminate the automatic
stay. Respondent cites no direct authority for the proposition
that the filing of petitioner's motion for reconsideration with
the bankruptcy court caused the automatic stay to remain in
effect. On the other hand, at least one appellate court has held
that the automatic stay terminated immediately upon the dismissal
of the debtor's bankruptcy case for failure to properly
prosecute, notwithstanding that the debtor undertook to file a
motion for reconsideration with the bankruptcy court within 10
days of the order of dismissal. See In re De Jesus Saez, 721
6(...continued)
(e) Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. A motion
to alter or amend the judgment shall be served not
later than 10 days after entry of the judgment.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011