Opinion
Case No. 12-00302
09-11-2012
In re EARL RUDOLPH BEDNEY, Debtor.
The document below is hereby signed.
_________________
, Jr.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
(Chapter 7)
Not for publication in
West's Bankruptcy Reporter.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING EMERGENCY MOTION TO
DISMISS FORECLOSURE PROCEEDING AND MOTION SEEKING LEAVE TO PLEAD
The debtor has filed motions seeking to challenge a creditor's foreclosure efforts against his home. The motions will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as the motions do not "arise under" the Bankruptcy Code, do not "arise in" the bankruptcy case, and are not "related to" the bankruptcy case within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b), the statute conferring limited subject matter jurisdiction over proceedings in this court.
As this court explained in granting relief from the automatic stay, the debtor has not pointed to any right he has under the Bankruptcy Code that would authorize alteration of the creditor's foreclosure rights. Instead, the debtor challenges the foreclosure under nonbankruptcy law. The debtor's motions do not "arise under" the Bankruptcy Code within the meaning of § 1334(b).
Nor do the motions "arise in" the bankruptcy case within the meaning of § 1334(b). The challenges already have an existence outside of the bankruptcy case.
Nor are the motions "related to" the bankruptcy case within the meaning of § 1334(b). The debtor claimed 100% of the "FMV" (meaning fair market value) of his home as exempt property. The time for objecting to the exemption has expired (unless the debtor were to assert that he fraudulently claimed the exemption or that 11 U.S.C. § 522(q) will apply in this case). See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4003(b). Because the debtor does not contend that he fraudulently claimed the exemption or that § 522(q) will apply in this case, the debtor has failed to show that the property has not become exempt property. 11 U.S.C. § 522(l). Property, once exempt, is no longer property of the estate. Accordingly, the debtor has not shown that stopping the foreclosure sale would have an impact on the administration of the estate. It follows that the motions are not "related to" the bankruptcy case.
For all of these reasons, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, it is
Moreover, the chapter 7 trustee is the party with standing to administer the property of the estate, and the debtor has not pled facts showing an economic interest conferring standing on him to assert a claim regarding the administration of the estate. In any event, if this court did have subject matter jurisdiction, and if the debtor did have standing, the relief the debtor seeks must be sought by way of an adversary proceeding complaint.
ORDERED that the debtor's Emergency Motion to Dismiss Foreclosures [sic] Proceeding and the debtor's motion styled Leave to Plead are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
[Signed and dated above.] Copies to: Debtor; recipients of e-notification.