Chae v. Bennett, No. 13-6041 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCreditor appealed from the orders of the bankruptcy court denying his requests for relief from the automatic stay and for abstention and remand. The court held that the bankruptcy court properly denied creditor's request for stay relief where there was no purpose for granting the stay since creditor's state court malpractice and negligence actions against debtor were dischargeable debts and his fraud claim was discharged when creditor failed to timely file an adversary proceeding. Further, there was no basis for an order of abstention and remand. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the bankruptcy court.
Court Description: Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Bankruptcy court did not err in denying Chae's motion for relief from the automatic stay provisions so that he could pursue his state court malpractice, fraud and negligence claims against debtor; the malpractice and negligence claims were dischargeable debts and the fraud claim was discharged when Chae failed to file a timely adversary proceeding [ November 12, 2013
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.