In re LaTempa

4 Citing cases

  1. In re Excel Engineering, Inc.

    224 B.R. 582 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1998)   Cited 10 times
    Refusing to recognize validity of postpetition creation and perfection of mechanic's lien because creditor had no lien at the time debtor filed for bankruptcy

    The case law provides for the recovery by the debtor of actual damages, including costs and attorney fees, as well as punitive damages for willful violations of the stay. See In re Bloom, 875 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1989); In re Atlantic Business Community Corp., 901 F.2d 325 (3rd Cir. 1990); In re Barney's Boats of Chicago, Inc., 616 F.2d 164 (5th Cir. 1980); In re La Tempa, 58 B.R. 538 (Bankr.W.D.Va. 1986); In re AM Internat'l, Inc., 53 B.R. 744 (Bankr.M.D.Tenn. 1985).

  2. In re Zunich

    88 B.R. 721 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1988)   Cited 37 times

    A violation of the automatic stay will not support a finding of contempt and/or damages and fees, in all cases. In re Aponte, 82 B.R. 738 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. 1988); In re Whitt, 79 B.R. 611 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. 1987); In re Wagner, 74 B.R. 898 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. 1987); In re La Tempa, 58 B.R. 538 (Bankr.W.D.Va. 1986); In re Mack, 46 B.R. 652 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. 1985). Sanctions for contempt are inappropriate under the Bankruptcy Code where a mere technical violation of the stay has occurred or where the litigant has acted in good faith.

  3. In re Kim

    71 B.R. 1011 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1987)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that " creditor cannot obtain relief from stay with no evidence whatever, and with only unsupported allegations. . . . A debtor need not offer evidence of adequate protection unless the creditor has established a prima facie case."

    See, e.g., In re Advent Corp., 24 B.R. 612, 614 (1st Cir. BAP 1982); LaTempa v. Long (In re LaTempa), 58 B.R. 538, 540 (Bankr.W.D.Va. 1986). The chief benefit to a creditor of lack of notice of the automatic stay is that it provides a defense to a claim under section 362(h) for damages, including punitive damages, and for costs and attorneys fees.

  4. In re Kim

    71 B.R. 1011 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1987)

    See, e.g., In re Advent Corp., 24 B.R. 612, 614 (1st Cir. BAP 1982); LaTempa v. Long (In re LaTempa), 58 B.R. 538, 540 (Bankr.W.D.Va.1986). The chief benefit to a creditor of lack of notice of the automatic stay is that it provides a defense to a claim under section 362(h) for damages, including punitive damages, and for costs and attorneys fees.