First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Jacksonville v. Dew Mortgage Co. (In re Dew Mortgage Co.)

11 Citing cases

  1. In re Eleven Oak Tower Ltd. Partnership

    59 B.R. 626 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1986)   Cited 20 times

    7. This Court finds and further concludes that the factor which overwhelmingly militates in favor of transferring this cause to Missouri is that Debtor's principal asset, the Eleven Oak Property, is located in Kansas City, Missouri. The administration of Debtor's case, which involves a high-rise office tower, can be most efficiently and expeditiously administered in the bankruptcy court closest to the situs of Debtor's principal asset. Courts have observed that "[M]atters concerning real property have always been of local concern and traditionally are decided at the situs of the property." First Federal Savings Loan v. Dew Mortgage Co., Inc. (In re Dew Mortgage Co., Inc.), 10 B.R. 242, 244 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1981). Although Debtor maintains books and records in Chicago, the records generated by the day-to-day operation of Debtor's property are in Missouri.

  2. In re Griggs

    679 F.2d 855 (11th Cir. 1982)   Cited 7 times

    In view of the provision for dismissal in former Bankruptcy Rule 116 which is absent in the new venue provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1475 and 1477, this argument has some force. See In re Dew Mortgage Co., 10 B.R. 242 (Bkrtcy.M D.Fla. 1981); In re Malone, 5 B.R. 658 (Bkrtcy.S.D.Cal. 1980). Compare 28 U.S.C. § 1477 with id. § 1406.

  3. In re 1606 New Hampshire Ave. Associates

    85 B.R. 298 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988)   Cited 40 times
    Finding equity cushion of $450,000 was 20% of the value of the collateral not of the secured claim

    Accord, In re Old Delmar Corp., 45 B.R. 883, 884 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. 1985). A similarly-strong statement is made in In re Dew Mortgage Co., 10 B.R. 242, 244 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1981), where it is said that "[m]atters concerning real property have always been of local concern and traditionally decided at the situs of the property." Particularly persuasive is the large body of cases which hold that, while venue is proper at the situs of the management office of a debtor that manages realty located elsewhere, venue should be transferred to the locus of the realty upon motion of creditors.

  4. In re Sundance Corp.

    84 B.R. 699 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1988)   Cited 6 times

    These cases point out the special consideration to administration at the situs of the assets where those assets consist of real property: `[M]atters concerning real property have always been of local concern and traditionally are decided at the situs of the property'. Old Delmar, 45 B.R. at 883, citing First Federal Savings Loan v. Dew Mortgage Co., Inc. ( In re Dew Mortgage Co., Inc.), 10 B.R. 242 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1981)." Id. at 803.

  5. In re Spicer Oaks Apartments, Ltd.

    80 B.R. 142 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1987)   Cited 8 times

    6. The necessity for ancillary administration if a liquidation should result.Hawaiian Investors v. Thorndal, 339 F.2d 807, 809 (8th Cir. 1965); In re Dew Mortgage Company, Inc., 10 B.R. 242, 243-44 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1981); In re Distributors Warehouse, Inc., 1 B.R. 539, 542 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1979). Other than the location of the Debtor, the criteria set forth above dictate that the proper venue of this Chapter 11 proceeding is the Middle District of Florida.

  6. In re Baltimore Food Systems, Inc.

    71 B.R. 795 (Bankr. D.S.C. 1986)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that the moving party bears the burden to demonstrate that venue is improper

    These cases point out the special consideration to administration at the situs of the assets where those assets consist of real property: "[M]atters concerning real property have always been of local concern and traditionally are decided at the situs of the property." Old Delmar, 45 B.R. at 883, citing First Federal Savings Loan v. Dew Mortgage Co., Inc. (In re Dew Mortgage Co., Inc.), 10 B.R. 242 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1981). In contrast to these cases, the assets of Baltimore Foods do not include title to real estate, and no similar emphasis upon local concerns need be given.

  7. Matter of Robintech Inc.

    35 B.R. 688 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1983)   Cited 1 times

    In re Rapco Foam, Inc., 16 B.R. 765, 8 B.C.D.857 (Bkrtcy. Mo. 1982); In re Rapco Foam, Inc., 23 B.R. 692, 693, 9 B.C.D. 858 (Bkrtcy.Wis. 1982); Stamm v. Rapco Foam, Inc., 21 B.R. 715 (Bkrtcy.Penn. 1982); In re Whitehorn, 9 B.R. 404, 405 (Bkrtcy.Ga. 1981); In re Dew Mortgage Company, Inc., 10 B.R. 242, 7 B.C.D. 583, 4 C.B.C.2d 535 (Bkrtcy.Fla. 1981); In re Burley, 11 B.R. 369, 7 B.C.D. 861, 4 C.B.C.2d 652 (Bkrtcy.Cal. 1981); Jahan v. Dakota Industries, Inc., 27 B.R. 575 (D.C.N.J. 1983); Green Tie Realty Corporation, 14 B.R. 923, 930, 8 B.C.D. 274, 5 C.B.C.2d 881 (Bkrtcy.N.Y. 1981). In order for this Court to hear and decide and render a final judgment, it is necessary to lift the automatic stay for that limited purpose only.

  8. In re Johns-Manville Corp.

    34 B.R. 587 (Bankr. W.D. La. 1983)   Cited 2 times

            The Plaintiffs cited one case where an adversary proceeding was filed in a Bankruptcy Court other than the home Bankruptcy Court. In the case of In re Dew Mortgage Company, Inc., Bkrtcy, Fla., 1981, 10 B.R. 242, the Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida ruled that it would retain a proceeding filed in that district seeking relief from an automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding which had been initiated in Illinois, because the property as to which relief from the automatic stay sought was located in Florida, witnesses were located in both districts, and appraisers would have to be hired in Florida to view the property and then taken to Illinois for trial if the Florida Court did not keep the case.         However, the court in In re Dew Mortgage, supra, in ruling against the transfer stated:

  9. In re Rapco Foam, Inc.

    16 B.R. 765 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1982)   Cited 3 times

    On balance, in the interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties, this action should be retained in this Court. In re Dew Mortgage Company, Inc., 10 B.R. 242 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla. 1981); In the Matter of Trim-Lean Meat Products, Inc., 11 B.R. 1010 (D.C.Del. 1981). Cf.

  10. In re Turner

    15 B.R. 265 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1981)   Cited 6 times

    Having once begun here, with attendant incurring of costs and expenses, a transfer can only increase costs both for the debtors and the courts and decrease efficiency of administration. Compare Matter of Trim-Lean Meat Products, Inc., 11 B.R. 1010 (D.C.Del. 1981) and In re Dew Mortgage Company, Inc., 10 B.R. 242 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla. 1981) with In re BSJ Tower Associates, 11 B.R. 449 (Bkrtcy.S.D.N.Y. 1981). The Motion to Transfer in each case, therefore, is DENIED.