11 U.S.C. § 362

Section 362(d) permits the bankruptcy court, but not a court of appeals, to lift the automatic stay retroactively.

HealthproMed Foundation, Inc. v. Dept. of Health And Human Serv · filed 2020-12-04(d)

In the companion appeal No. 19-1336 the Commonwealth also took the position that In re Soares and 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) permit this court to retroactively lift the automatic stay in appropriate circumstances. The FQHCs endorsed this view. We reject that argument. Neither In re Soares nor the statute gives the court of appeals as opposed to the bankruptcy court such authority.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause.

Klein v. Estate of Zvunca · filed 2016-11-28(d)(1)

Yet, as evidenced by the use of the word “annulment” in the statute, bankruptcy courts are indeed authorized to grant retroactive relief from a purported violation of the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when the circumstances justify validating acts taken in violation of the stay.

In re McCrimmon · filed 2015-08-26(d)(1)

This case presents the sort of unusual and compelling circumstance in which it is appropriate to grant retroactive relief to validate action that might otherwise be void by reason 'of violation of the automatic stay. Thus, I find that there is cause to annul the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) as requested by Dane.

Section 362(d) allows a bankruptcy court to modify the automatic stay retroactively; an order permitting an action filed during the stay to proceed can have that effect without saying nunc pro tunc.

Zollman v. Gregory · filed 2001-02-07(d)

Thus, we believe it is sufficiently clear that even though the bankruptcy court's order did not specifically state that the modification would operate nunc pro tunc, the order did represent the bankruptcy court's intent to retroactively modify the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) does not authorize annulment of the automatic stay for cause based only on anticipated delay and costs of repeating a foreclosure when future relief from the stay has not been established.

In Re Major · filed 1998-03-24(d)(1)

Regional states that the sale should be affirmed so as to avoid unnecessary delay and increased costs resulting from the sale being “set aside and rescheduled after relief from the automatic stay could be obtained.” This Court views Regional’s statement as a proffer of “cause” under § 362(d)(1). That assertion is without merit because it concludes that this Court will act in a certain way with regard to a matter not yet before this Court.

Section 362(d)(1) permits annulment of the automatic stay for cause when a debtor is used as a nondebtor’s alter ego to shield assets from collection.

Faith Missionary Baptist Church v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Faith Missionary Baptist Church) · filed 1994-09-06(d)(1)

The Court finds that under the facts of this ease it would be an abuse of the Bankruptcy Code to permit the Gorhams (non-debtors) to use the automatic stay to stop the IRS’s collection efforts when the entity holding legal title (FMBC) is the Gor-hams’ alter ego. Thus, the Court finds that there is more than sufficient cause to annul the automatic stay as it applies to the IRS.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay retroactively, leaving the stay without effect and validating a judgment entered while it was in place.

First National Bank of River Falls v. Slater · filed 1984-08-07(d)

“Annul” must consequently mean something other than “terminate,” “modify,” or “condition.” We interpret it to mean that the stay was deprived of all force and operation; was void and of no effect; a nullity.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively in appropriately limited circumstances.

Albany Partners, Ltd. v. Westbrook (In re Albany Partners, Ltd.) · filed 1984-12-26(d)

Accordingly, we hold that § 362(d) permits bankruptcy courts, in appropriately limited circumstances, to grant retroactive relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits a court to annul the automatic stay with retroactive effect, validating a sale made while the stay was in force.

Algeran, Inc. v. Advance Ross Corporation · filed 1985-05-09(d)

Algeran's position that an automatic stay cannot be lifted so as to validate a sale made while the stay was in force, is without merit. Section 362(d) of Title 11 empowers the court to grant relief from the automatic stay by "terminating, annulling, modifying, or conditioning it." The district judge annulled the automatic stay as to the sale of AMI shares, as he was entitled to do under the statute and the facts of this case. With the automatic stay annulled, the sale that occurred cannot be said to be invalid. We find no reason or authority (and Algeran has produced nothing persuasive on this issue) prohibiting the nunc pro tunc effect of the order of annulment.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay only in very compelling circumstances involving unusual or irreparable harm to a creditor.

In Re Crawley · filed 1985-08-21(d)

The Court does have the power to annul the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d). This seems to me to be an extreme remedy. I do not think it should be granted except in very compelling situations where it can be shown that unusual and/or irreparable harm will be caused to a creditor if the stay is not annulled.

Section 362(d) treats terminating and annulling the automatic stay as distinct forms of relief.

McAuley v. Orange Coast Thrift & Loan Ass'n (In Re McAuley) · filed 1986-09-26(d)

Annulment is a term of art; the Code clearly distinguishes between “terminating, annulling, modifying, or conditioning” a stay.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively and validate a foreclosure sale when the creditor lacked notice of the stay and the circumstances justify relief.

In Re Tanksley · filed 1987-02-23(d)

Retroactive relief from the stay is appropriate where, as here, the creditor’s violation of the stay was done without actual or constructive knowledge of the stay, there is no equity in the property for the estate or the debtor, the property is not necessary for effective reorganization by reason of the case being a Chapter 7 liquidation, relief from the stay would in any case be granted upon the filing of a motion, and repetition of the foreclosure sale would entail needless expense to the creditor.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively when circumstances warrant, validating actions taken while the stay was in effect.

In Re Behr · filed 1987-05-15(d)

In certain circumstances, § 362(d) permits bankruptcy courts to grant retroactive relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively and validate actions taken while the stay was in effect when the circumstances warrant it.

In Re Clark · filed 1987-10-09(d)

Annul implies a reach-back ability. Accordingly, the Court finds it has power, in appropriate circumstances, to annul the effect of the automatic stay in a manner which retroactively validates certain actions.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively and give effect to a state court judgment entered while the stay was in force.

In re Jones · filed 1988-04-20(d)

Taking the Motion of JOHN H. LANGDON and MARJORIE LANGDON as a motion to annul the automatic stay as to the damage claim arising upon the fraud cause of action in state court, the Motion is sustained. The automatic stay is annulled as to that issue and the state court judgment as to that issue, being avoidable, is hereby determined to be given full force and effect the same as if it were tried and the state trial court’s decision had been rendered after relief from the automatic stay had therebe-fore been granted by this Court.

Section 362 permits annulment of the automatic stay, but creditors’ claimed good faith does not justify retroactive validation of a judgment when they knew of the stay and the judgment was void.

Walker v. Wilde (In Re Walker) · filed 1988-09-30(d)

The court cannot find that these factors are sufficiently critical to justify annulling the stay and validating the judgment. The Higleys had actual knowledge of the stay and the judgment upon which they seek to collect was declared void.

Section 362(d) authorizes a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively.

In re Superior Equipment Manufacturing Co. · filed 1989-01-26(d)

The Debtor does not dispute that the Court has the authority to annul the stay retroactively and the Court finds that, under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), it has such authority.

Section 362(d) permits a court to annul the automatic stay from the filing date when a debtor files a second bankruptcy case while another remains pending to evade an earlier order lifting the stay.

GEIBank Industrial Bank v. Martin (In Re Martin) · filed 1989-03-09(d)

With a case pending, debtor was ineligible to file a new case thus creating a new stay. ... Accordingly, the automatic stay will be annulled ab initio as of the filing date of this new Chapter 7 case.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively when a case was filed in bad faith, allowing a creditor to record a foreclosure conducted after the petition was filed.

First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Warner Robins v. Oakbrook Village, Inc. (In Re Oakbrook Village, Inc.) · filed 1989-06-02(d)

Consequently, there being no justification for a finding of any changed circumstances in the Debtor’s situation since the dismissal of its previous case I conclude that the within case was also filed in bad faith. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 362(d) the automatic stay is annulled to permit Movant to record evidence of its foreclosure under state law and pursue any additional remedies it may possess under state law.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay after a good-faith foreclosure when the creditor lacked knowledge of the bankruptcy, the debtor's interest was unenforceable against the creditor, and the notified debtor failed to assert its status before foreclosure.

In the Matter of PINETREE, LTD., Debtor. the MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. PINETREE, LTD., Debtor · filed 1989-07-25(d)

Thus, where a creditor having no knowledge of a pending bankruptcy forecloses in good faith on the collateral, and where the debtor’s interest in that collateral is unenforceable against that creditor, and where the debtor, although notified in advance of the foreclosure, failed to assert its status before the foreclosure, we conclude that the automatic stay should have been annulled with respect to the post-bankruptcy foreclosure.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay when sufficient cause exists.

Germer v. Farmers State Bank of Plymouth (In Re Germer) · filed 1989-08-18(d)

The Bank has requested that the automatic stay be annulled, and I conclude that sufficient cause exists to annul the stay with respect to the Bank.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively and validate actions taken while it was in effect.

Robert A. Sikes and Janice K. Sikes v. Global Marine, Inc. · filed 1989-10-11(d)

The power to annul authorizes retroactive relief even unto the date of the filing of the petition giving rise to the automatic stay. The power to annul authorizes the court to validate actions taken subsequent to the impressing of the section 362(a) stay.

Section 362(d) allows a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay retroactively and validate actions taken after the stay began.

Cissne v. Robertson · filed 1989-12-01(d)

The power to annul authorizes retroactive relief even unto the date of the filing of the petition giving rise to the automatic stay. The power to annul authorizes the bankruptcy court to validate actions taken subsequent to the impressing of the 362(a) stay.

Section 362(d) allows a bankruptcy court, in exceptional cases and for cause, to annul the automatic stay retroactively so that a suit filed during the stay can proceed.

Pettibone Corp. v. Baker (In Re Pettibone Corp.) · filed 1990-02-07(d)

After the 30-day period has run, only at the discretion of the court which controlled the stay, in exceptional cases and for cause shown, may special relief be granted by cautious application of § 362(d) to annul the stay thereby allowing resurrection of any suit filed while the stay was in effect.

Section 362(d) permits a court to terminate rather than annul the automatic stay, leaving a foreclosure sale conducted in violation of the stay void.

Maryland National Mortgage Corp. v. Burns (In Re Burns) · filed 1990-02-26(d)

Section 362(d) includes authority for the bankruptcy court either to terminate or to annul the automatic stay. ... Therefore the Court concludes that in this case the automatic stay will be terminated, rather than annulled. The foreclosure action taken by the trustee under the deed of trust after receiving notice of the debtor’s bankruptcy petition is held void, and it will be necessary for the trustee to begin anew the foreclosure process.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay in proper circumstances to address a stay violation that is otherwise void.

In Re Lampkin · filed 1990-07-24(d)

This court will adhere to the general rule that violations of the stay are void. The present facts do not require the court to consider extending the exception recognized in § 549(c). Consonant with the power provided in 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), the court may annul the stay as to Duval in proper circumstances.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause without requiring debtor bad faith or evasive court action.

Pettibone Corp. v. Baker · filed 1990-08-23(d)

The Bankruptcy Code, however, grants a bankruptcy judge the equitable discretion to annul the automatic stay “for cause.” 11 U.S.C. § 362(d). We reject Pettibone’s assertion that “cause” may only be established by bad faith or evasive court action by the debtor.

Section 362 permits annulment of the automatic stay for an innocent foreclosure when equitable considerations warrant it, regardless of whether a stay violation is void or voidable.

In Re Mesa Business Park Partnership · filed 1991-03-06(d)

On the one hand, only an innocent foreclosure can qualify for annulment. ... The court can thus decide whether the stay should be annulled based on equitable considerations, wholly apart from whether the foreclosure in question is void or merely voidable.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay retroactively, validating state court action taken after the stay began.

Price v. Cole · filed 1991-07-02(d)

Use in the statute of the word “annulling” as an alternative to “terminating” conveys the statutory purpose of enabling the judge to give retroactive effect to an order to annul, so that the State (or other) action is validated as of the date when it was taken.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the equities favor validating an act taken during the stay.

Formisano v. National Community Bank (In Re Formisano) · filed 1992-11-02(d)

Therefore, the court finds that the automatic stay as it relates to the tax sale conducted by the Borough on December 14, 1989 is retroactively annulled.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate actions taken during the stay, but the bankruptcy court must do so explicitly; merely lifting the stay is insufficient.

Schulz v. Holmes Transportation, Inc. · filed 1993-01-21(d)

However, in order to fully safeguard the policy behind the automatic stay, it is my opinion that any exercise by the bankruptcy court of its power to annul and thereby validate acts taken in violation the stay must be explicit. Put another way, I do not believe a lifting of the stay to allow prosecution of a claim is sufficient to annul the stay retroactively so as to validate what has previously occurred with respect to a particular claim.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively, validating actions taken during the stay when the equities warrant it.

In Re WMR Enterprises, Inc. · filed 1994-01-10(d)

While it is true, as we have noted, that acts taken in violation of the stay are generally void, the provisions of § 362(d) grants the bankruptcy courts the power to annul the automatic stay in addition to terminating or modifying it.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively, validating acts that otherwise violated it.

In Re Leonard J. Siciliano, Debtor. Prudential Savings Bank, Pasa · filed 1994-01-11(d)

An annulment can operate retroactively to rehabilitate violations of an automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay when unique circumstances justify retroactively validating an act taken in violation of the stay, based on a balance of the equities.

Atkins v. Atlantic Ambulance Associates, Inc. (In Re Atlantic Ambulance Associates, Inc.) · filed 1994-04-06(d)

The fact that most of the cases hold actions in violation of the stay void indicates that there must be unique circumstances to justify annulment of the stay. In substance the creditor seeking to validate an act taken in violation of the stay is asking the bankruptcy court to exercise its equitable power to balance the equities between the parties.

Section 362(d) permits bankruptcy courts to annul the automatic stay retroactively when equitable considerations warrant.

Noonan v. Jones (In Re Jones) · filed 1994-11-08(d)

In light of the persuasive authority cited above, the court concludes that section 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code does authorize bank: ruptcy courts to annul the automatic stay retroactively, in appropriately limited circumstances when equitable considerations warrant.

A bankruptcy court’s retroactive annulment of the automatic stay validates a foreclosure sale held before the annulment order.

Sweeney v. Great Western Bank · filed 1994-11-10

Thus, the defendants' foreclosure sale held on October 20, 1992 was valid because there was no stay in place at the time due to the bankruptcy court's grant of retroactive relief.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay only when extraordinary circumstances make that relief equitable.

In Re Confidential Investigative Consultants, Inc. · filed 1995-02-10(d)

When a bankruptcy judge acts to annul retroactively the automatic stay, such action may be taken only after a determination that the principles of equity require such a result because of the extraordinary circumstances in a particular case.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay and retroactively validate actions taken in violation of it, even if the creditor knew of the stay.

In re Glaser · filed 1995-05-19(d)

Section 362(d) permits the court, in annulling a stay, to validate retroactively actions taken by a party that would otherwise be in violation of the stay. ... Thus, although Glaser provided some evidence that Homeowners proceeded with its foreclosure with full knowledge of his April 14, 1992 filing, that evidence did not limit the court's discretion to validate Homeowners' actions.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, validating actions taken during the stay and foreclosing damages for those actions under subsection (h).

Thompson v. Board of Trustees (In Re Thompson) · filed 1995-05-23(d)(1)

Accordingly, the circumstances of this case dictate that we enter an order annulling the automatic stay, effective as of the petition date. Because an annulment of the stay has the effect of validating the Board’s actions, we find that no “violation” of the stay has occurred. Consequently, Thompson is unable to recover damages and fees under 11 U.S.C. § 362(h).

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay only in limited circumstances and requires cause for relief from the stay.

In Re Lizeric Realty Corp. · filed 1995-11-28(d)

Moreover, debtor has not established cause under either § 362(d)(1) or (2) for relief from the stay. The automatic stay should not be annulled under § 362(a) to give effect to actions taken in violation of the stay except in limited circumstances.

Section 362(d)(3) permits retroactive modification of the automatic stay to validate a foreclosure completed before the secured creditor learned of the bankruptcy filing.

In Re Leroy Jones and Paula Faye Jones, Debtors. Leroy Jones and Paula Faye Jones v. Alfred Garcia and Rosie A. Garcia · filed 1995-10-25(d)(3)

In this case, the district court merely exercised its discretion to modify the stay, as section 362(d)(3) authorizes, thereby validating the foreclosure and transfer of title to the Garcias.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when the circumstances warrant it, including a seemingly bad-faith filing just before a state trial concludes and substantial hardship to creditors from a retrial.

In Re Michael J. Kissinger, Debtor. Thomas Mataya, Creditor-Appellee v. Michael J. Kissinger, Debtor-Appellant · filed 1995-12-15(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in finding that retroactive relief was warranted. The court first found that there would have been cause to lift the stay prospectively at the time of the Chapter 11 filing because: the state court claim was sufficiently large such that it would have to be resolved before Kissinger could complete a reorganization; Kissinger was able to defend himself in the state court action; and Kissinger’s decision to file a Chapter 11 petition just before the state court action was to go to the jury appeared to be in bad faith. Additionally, the bankruptcy court found that there was additional cause to annul the stay retroactively to the time of the filing because: the failure to obey the stay was caused by the state court judge, not the creditor; and not annulling the stay would either lead to nonsensical results, by submitting the same case to the same jury that had just rendered a decision, or impose an unwarranted hardship on the creditors, since retrial would be costly. The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in finding that these circumstances warranted retroactive annulment of the automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate a stay violation, but such relief generally requires unique or compelling circumstances.

Kemper Insurance v. Profile Systems, Inc. (In Re Profile Systems, Inc.) · filed 1996-03-27(d)

The inclusion of “annulling” in the statute affording relief from the stay indicates an evident legislative intent to vest the bankruptcy court with the power to grant relief retroactively to the date of the bankruptcy filing and thereby cure or validate actions taken in violation of the statutory stay in certain instances. ... Retroactive relief is not an automatic remedy or routinely granted in the ordinary course. On the contrary, retroactive relief is an extraordinary remedy and should generally be granted in only unique or compelling circumstances since the violator is essentially asking the court to exercise its power to balance the equities between the parties.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay as an exceptional remedy, but a party’s knowledge of the bankruptcy and bankruptcy-motivated action weigh against annulment.

In Re Elder-Beerman Stores Corp. · filed 1996-05-03(d)

In this case, not only was Thomasville aware of Elder-Beerman’s bankruptcy petition, but was clearly motivated by the bankruptcy in its action. As such, the court finds no compelling reason to exercise the exceptional remedy of annulment.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the stay for specified acts when an unaware creditor had cause for relief and would otherwise lose rights.

In Re Halas · filed 1996-04-09(d)(1)

Thus, since the Ohrs did not know that Debtor had filed a second bankruptcy petition, and because they had a valid legal cause for modifying the automatic stay, the automatic stay was annulled as to the relevant notices the Ohrs served and as to their filing of a petition for tax deed.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from and annulment of the automatic stay for cause when a bankruptcy filing is made in bad faith.

Blatnick v. Sanders (In Re Sanders) · filed 1996-06-28(d)(1)

Under all the circumstances of this ease, the Court holds that Movants have established that the present case is a bad faith filing as to them sufficient to find cause for relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). Moreover, because of the history of this case, and the conduct of both debtor and his counsel in not notifying either Movants or the foreclosure trustee of the bankruptcy filing prior to the foreclosure sale, annulment of the stay is warranted.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay, but a court may deny annulment after balancing the equities when a creditor knowingly forecloses during the stay.

Blue Ridge Bank v. Boswell (In Re Boswell) · filed 1997-02-27(d)(1)

Annulment under § 362(d) grants retroactive relief to a party who acted in violation of the stay; consequently, the stay is rendered a nullity vis-a-vis that party’s actions. ... The statute provides little guidance on when such relief is appropriate; thus, many courts will annul the stay only when that course is consistent with general equitable principles. ... Considering the specific facts of this ease and taking into account both the fresh start policy of the Bankruptcy Code and the important role which 11 U.S.C. § 362 plays in the bankruptcy process, this Court declines to annul the automatic stay of § 362.

An order annulling the automatic stay ab initio removes the stay objection to a trustee’s joinder in a state court action.

Connecticut National Bank v. D'Onofrio · filed 1997-08-19(a)

The defendants only argument in appeal no. 16141, which was not raised in appeal no. 14201, was that the trial court improperly granted Coan’s motion to correct because it was without jurisdiction due to Coan’s failure to obtain relief from stay under § 362 (a) prior to filing his amended complaint in August, 1994. On April 24,1996, the Bankruptcy Court, Shiff, J., in response to Coan’s motion for relief from stay, issued an order annulling the automatic stay ab initio, thus eliminating any doubt as to the validity of Coan’s joinder in this action. As a result, the trial court properly exercised its jurisdiction.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay, subject to equitable considerations.

In Re Adams · filed 1997-08-27(d)

Section 362(d) allows the Court to “annul” the effects of the automatic stay, as well as terminate or modify the stay. ... In this case the equitable considerations weigh in favor of not granting retroactive relief.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively so that a foreclosure sale conducted after the bankruptcy filing can stand.

In Re Hurst · filed 1997-09-18(d)

Therefore, the Court will annul the automatic stay, effectively granting relief nunc pro tunc to July 24, 1997, the date of the foreclosure sale.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when a case by case balance of the equities justifies it.

National Environmental Waste Corp. v. City of Riverside · filed 1997-11-10(d)(1)

Thus, this court, similar to others, balances the equities in order to determine whether retroactive annulment is justified.

Section 362(d)(1) allows retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause based on a case-by-case balance of the equities; creditor knowledge of the bankruptcy and debtor misconduct are not dispositive.

In re National Environmental Waste Corp. · filed 1997-11-10(d)(1)

However, we have never held these two factors to be dispositive; instead, we have engaged in a case by case analysis. ... Thus, this court, similar to others, balances the equities in order to determine whether retroactive annulment is justified.

Retroactive annulment of the automatic stay removes the stay as a basis for a wrongful foreclosure claim arising from the sale.

Farris v. Nationsbanc Mortgage Corp. · filed 1997-11-17

Thus, the stay cannot serve as any basis for a wrongful foreclosure claim; it did not exist as far as this sale is concerned and consequently was not violated by the sale.

Mere silence by a debtor in response to foreclosure notices does not require a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively on equitable grounds.

Pro Finance, Inc. v. Spriggs · filed 1998-11-16

However, we agree with the determination of the BAP that mere silence is inadequate to require a court to retroactively annul the effects of an automatic stay for equitable reasons.

Section 362(d) allows retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the equities support it, and the bankruptcy court’s decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion.

Christian v. Citibank, F.S.B. · filed 1999-03-15(d)

The decision whether to lift the stay pursuant to Section 362(d) is committed to the discretion of the bankruptcy court, and the decision may be overturned only upon a showing of abuse of discretion. ... The decision on remand to annul the stay is not an abuse of the court’s equitable discretion.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when a creditor lacked actual knowledge that the stay applied and would be unfairly prejudiced if the debtor could invoke it as a defense.

In Re Syed · filed 1999-05-13(d)

It is appropriate to annul the automatic stay retroactively whenever a creditor did not have actual knowledge of the applicability of the automatic stay at the time the creditor violated the stay, and the creditor would be unfairly prejudiced if the debtor could raise the stay as a defense to the action or proceeding in which the creditor seeks to perfect an interest in the premises.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause to validate postpetition perfection of a mortgage.

In Re Scott · filed 2001-02-01(d)(1)

The Court finds that in this case, “cause” exists as required by § 362(d)(1) to annul the stay retroactively to allow the perfection of the Credit Union’s mortgage.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause when debtors allow litigation to proceed without raising the stay.

In Re Harris · filed 2001-08-17(d)(1)

Finally, and most importantly, this Court finds that cause exists to annul the stay under § 362(d) because the Debtors allowed the state court action to proceed under the new case number, and actively defended themselves in that action, without ever suggesting that the Joneses were violating the automatic stay in pursuing that action.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when a creditor acted without knowledge of the bankruptcy and enforcing the stay would unfairly prejudice it.

In Re Bates · filed 2001-12-12(d)

In particular, annulment is appropriate where the creditor who took action in violation of the stay had no knowledge of the bankruptcy and would be unfairly prejudiced by stay enforcement.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court deciding whether cause exists for retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to consider events after the bankruptcy petition was filed.

Aheong v. Mellon Mortgage Co. (In Re Aheong) · filed 2002-03-29(d)(1)

Debtor argues that the bankruptcy court should not have considered her two subsequent bankruptcies but should have decided the issue based on facts as of date she filed her first bankruptcy petition. Debtor cites no authority for this proposition, and it is inconsistent with the very nature of retroactive relief from the automatic stay and the broad definition of "cause" to grant such relief.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a court to balance the equities before retroactively annulling the automatic stay; a purchaser’s bona fide status alone is insufficient cause.

Fjeldsted v. Lien (In Re Fjeldsted) · filed 2003-04-30(d)(1)

We conclude that a determination of whether or not to annul the automatic stay and thereby grant retroactive relief requires the court to balance the equities, and that bona fide purchaser status alone is not cause to validate a sale.

Section 362(d)(1) allows a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay retroactively for cause to rehabilitate actions taken in violation of the stay.

Bunch v. Hoffinger Industries, Inc. · filed 2003-06-02(d)(1)

Bankruptcy courts have the power to annul an automatic stay retroactively for cause pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(1) in order to rehabilitate stay violations.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause based on the totality of the circumstances, including the parties’ knowledge of the bankruptcy case, inequitable conduct, and prejudice.

In Re Mannie · filed 2003-07-22(d)(1)

Thus, the Court must balance the equities based on the totality of circumstances, keeping in mind factors such as the parties’ knowledge of the bankruptcy case, inequitable conduct, and prejudice to the interested parties.

Section 362(d)(1) permits annulment of the automatic stay when a creditor foreclosed without knowing of the bankruptcy case and would have received relief from the stay before foreclosing.

In Re Allen · filed 2003-09-05(d)(1)

Because Wells Fargo was unaware of Mrs. Allen’s ownership interest or of her bankruptcy case when it sold the property at foreclosure to a third party, and because Wells Fargo would have obtained relief from the stays to proceed with foreclosure had it known of the bankruptcy case before foreclosing, annulment of the automatic stay and co-debtor stay was appropriate.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay after an unwitting foreclosure when leaving the stay in place would unfairly prejudice the creditor and a third-party purchaser.

In Re Allen · filed 2003-09-05(d)

Here the violation of the stays was innocent, and not annulling the stays would subject the third-party purchaser at the foreclosure sale and Wells Fargo to unfair prejudice.

Section 362(d)(1) requires annulment to validate an action filed in violation of the automatic stay because terminating or lifting the stay operates only prospectively.

In Re Enron Corp. · filed 2004-03-15(d)(1)

In any event, the Court denies MARTA’s Motion because MARTA has failed to move for an annulment of the automatic stay. ... An order terminating or “lifting” the automatic stay operates only from the date of entry of the order and does not affect the status of actions taken between the filing of the petition and the entry of the order. ... The State Court Action is deemed void absent an annulment. Terminating rather than annulling the automatic stay to continue with an action that is deemed void as against ENA makes no sense. The Court, therefore, denies MARTA’s request for relief from the automatic stay on this basis as well.

Annulment of an automatic stay under Section 362(d) gives retroactive effect to a North Carolina foreclosure proceeding only if it otherwise complies with state law, including required readvertisement and resale.

BENEFICIAL MORTGAGE CO. OF NORTH CAROLINA INC. v. Barrington · filed 2004-05-04(d)

Upon lifting the stay as of 15 January 1996, the foreclosing trustee was still required to comply with N.C. Gen.Stat. § 45-21.22(c). When Judge Small's condition ripened to annul the stay, we believe the annulment's retroactive effect applied only to the foreclosure proceeding as long as it otherwise complied with state law.

Section 362(d) permits bankruptcy courts to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause and thereby validate acts taken in violation of the stay.

Takayama v. Ehrlich · filed 2004-05-24(d)

Under § 362(d), bankruptcy courts have the discretion to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause in order to rehabilitate stay violations.

Section 362(d) allows a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause and thereby validate acts that violated the stay.

Wiencko v. Erlich · filed 2004-05-24(d)

Under § 362(d), bankruptcy courts have the discretion to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause in order to rehabilitate stay vio- lations.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment for cause when a debtor conceals bankruptcy while actively litigating, the creditor lacks actual or constructive knowledge, and invalidating the resulting judgment would prejudice the creditor.

In Re Barr · filed 2004-11-23(d)(1)

First, the record is abundantly clear that Duwaik did not have either actual or constructive knowledge of the Debtor’s bankruptcy cases. ... Second, the Court finds that the Debtor did not act in good faith in his bankruptcy cases with respect to Duwaik. ... The Debtor’s lack of good faith is also evidenced by the fact that he actively participated in the Duwaik litigation at the same time that he was prosecuting his bankruptcy cases. ... Based on all of the facts and circumstances described above, the Court finds that Duwaik’s Motion should be granted, that the automatic stay should be annulled retroactively for “cause” within the meaning of § 362(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, and that the Debtor’s bankruptcy proceedings should have no effect on the Judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Middle of Florida on May 8, 2003.

Annulment of the automatic stay retroactively validates a state appellate decision issued while the stay was in effect.

Ex Parte Williford · filed 2004-12-03(d)

Therefore, because the bankruptcy court annulled the automatic stay, this Court had jurisdiction when it issued its original decision and remanded the case.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate a foreclosure sale where equity requires protection of innocent subsequent purchasers and the debtor has established no damage from the sale.

In Re Bright · filed 2005-08-29(d)

The situation here is different— HomeSide sold the Property to a third party who has conveyed it to a fourth party, neither of them being brought into the present litigation and perhaps completely unaware of it. Equity should protect such remote innocent parties, and it is on their behalf that I shall grant the relief sought. There is an incidental benefit to HomeSide in this result of which it is undeserving but it cannot be avoided. There is no detriment to Debtor as she has not established that she was in any way damaged by the sale. ... An order will enter granted an annulment of the automatic stay effective to validate the sale of the Property.

An order annulling the automatic stay under Section 362(d) retroactively validates actions taken in violation of the stay without needing to expressly state its retroactive effect.

Jones v. Countywide Home Loans, Inc. (In re Jones) · filed 2005-09-22(d)

Given the unambiguous nature of the meaning of annulment, a Bankruptcy Court’s annulment order need not specifically state that it is retroactively validating a violation of an automatic stay; it is sufficient that the order state that the automatic stay is annulled. The retroactive effect is implicit in the order.

Section 362(d) permits discretionary retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate otherwise void acts when the bankruptcy petition was filed in bad faith.

Myers v. Southern Medical Supply Co. (In Re Myers) · filed 2005-10-17(d)

Nonetheless, in certain circumstances, courts may validate violations of the stay retroactively by “annulling” the stay nunc pro tunc. ... Here, the bankruptcy court noted that Appellant-debtor’s bad-faith filing would justify annulling the automatic stay, Myers II, at 3, and in so concluding, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment where preserving the stay would serve no meaningful bankruptcy purpose and the creditor’s counsel lacked knowledge of the filing, with debtor bad faith weighing in favor of annulment.

In Re Anderson · filed 2006-02-06(d)(1)

One factor weighing in favor of annulling the automatic stay is Mrs. Anderson’s bad faith. ... However, because no meaningful bankruptcy purpose would be served by failing to annul the stay (and by thus rendering the writ of possession void as in violation of the stay), and because GRP’s counsel was not aware that this bankruptcy case was filed prior to the issuance of the writ, it is appropriate to annul the stay to keep the writ in place.

Section 362(d)(1) permits annulment of the automatic stay when a bad-faith bankruptcy filing constitutes an abuse of the bankruptcy system.

Allen v. Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A. · filed 2005-12-13(d)(1)

As discussed ... the Bankruptcy Court held that the appellants’ bankruptcy filing constituted an abuse of the bankruptcy system. Because substantial evidence exists in support of the annulment, this court affirms the Bankruptcy Court’s conclusion.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when a debtor’s bad faith and innocent purchasers’ intervening rights present compelling circumstances, even if the creditor’s lack of notice resulted from its own inadequate records and searches.

Bright v. Washington Mutual Bank (In Re Bright) · filed 2006-02-23(d)

Although HomeSide’s lack of knowledge was not a sufficient reason to retroactively lift the stay, the Debtor’s overriding bad faith and the intervening rights of third parties were compelling circumstances warranting retroactive relief. Although HomeSide’s alleged lack of notice of the Debtor’s bankruptcy filing was due to the inadequacy of its own record keeping and search procedures, the notice issue is not sufficient to outweigh the relief granted in light of the other compelling circumstances.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay based on a balance of equities, with the significance of the stay weighing heavily against the party seeking annulment.

Moore v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development (In Re Moore) · filed 2006-04-20(d)

Courts balance the equities when deciding upon an annulment rendering the stay a nullity in relation to the acts of the transgressing party. ... In balancing the equities, though, the significance of the automatic stay weighs heavily against the party seeking an annulment. ... The court finds that the equities of this case do not favor annulment of the stay.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate acts of a creditor who lacked notice of the bankruptcy because the debtor failed to schedule the creditor.

In Re Nazu, Inc. · filed 2006-08-25(d)

Farr was unaware of the automatic stay when she violated it because the Debtor failed to schedule her as a creditor. ... This Court therefore grants Farr relief from the automatic stay retroactively to the date of the Debtor’s filing of its petition, so that her actions in violation of the automatic stay are not void and are hereby validated.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay after dismissal of the bankruptcy case.

Williams v. Levi · filed 2006-10-12(d)

The stay in Williams’ second bankruptcy case arose under § 362(a), and the statute does not limit annulment to stays arising in pending cases. We agree with the BAP that the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to enter the order.

The automatic stay may be annulled to permit state-court confirmation of a foreclosure sale completed before a Chapter 13 petition, even though confirmation remained pending when the petition was filed.

In Re Woodford · filed 2006-10-15(d)(1)

After consideration of counsels’ oral arguments and exhibits, this Court orders that the automatic stay be annulled so that the property at issue is not included in the Debtors’ Chapter 13 plan in order to allow the Secured Creditors to obtain confirmation of the July 10, 2006, foreclosure sale in state court.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate a foreclosure sale for cause, with the debtor’s bad faith, the creditor’s lack of notice, and its prompt request for relief weighing in favor of annulment.

In Re Campbell · filed 2006-12-11(d)

Specifically, § 362(d) authorizes the court, in appropriate limited circumstances, to annul the automatic stay, the effect of which is to grant retroactive relief and validate an action taken which might otherwise be of no effect. ... Debtor’s conduct, both in this case and the prior two Chapter 13 filings, evidences a lack of good faith. ... While it was Movant’s affirmative act of conducting the sale that resulted in the violation of the stay, that act was taken without notice or knowledge of the filing. Another factor weighing in favor of granting an annulment of the automatic stay is Movant’s good faith in promptly seeking relief upon learning of the filing.

An order annulling the automatic stay implicitly operates retroactively to validate a stay violation without expressly stating that retroactive effect.

Jones v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (In Re Jones) · filed 2007-01-23(d)

The Court further concluded that “[g]iven the unambiguous nature of the meaning of annulment, a Bankruptcy Court’s annulment order need not specifically state that it is retroactively validating a violation of an automatic stay; it is sufficient that the order state that the automatic stay is annulled. The retroactive effect is implicit in the order.” App. at 7. We agree.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause where a state-law judgment is substantially complete and annulment will cause little harm to the debtor’s estate.

In Re Bennett · filed 2007-02-01(d)

As explained previously, the final judgment entered by the California court against the debtor and co-plaintiffs was done so after the decision by the court to award attorneys’ fees and costs had been rendered three months prior to the final judgment. The delay in judgment was merely to allow Columbia an opportunity to file an application for attorneys’ fees and costs so that the court could determine the exact amount of the judgment. ... Finally, as in the Wiencko case, there will be little harm to the debtor’s estate caused by the retroactive annulment of the automatic stay. ... Based on the foregoing, the motion of Columbia for lifting the automatic stay and for the retroactive annulment of the automatic stay is ALLOWED.

Section 362 permits bankruptcy courts to annul the automatic stay retroactively.

In re Tara Hills, Inc. · filed 2007-05-01(d)

Bankruptcy courts clearly have the authority to annul retroactively the automatic stay.

A foreclosure sale initially void for violating the automatic stay can be retroactively validated by the bankruptcy court’s annulment of the stay.

Vereen v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. · filed 2007-06-04(a), (d)

The transfer, initially made void by 11 USC § 362 (a), was expressly made valid by the bankruptcy court’s order annulling the stay, id. at (d), so that the conveyance of the property out of the debtor’s estate was legal.

Section 362(d) permits bankruptcy courts to balance the equities and retroactively annul the automatic stay, ratifying actions that were otherwise void because they violated the stay.

In Re: Myers · filed 2007-06-21(d)

We reaffirm that actions in violation of the stay are void but retroactively ratifiable if the stay is annulled, as this conclusion gives courts flexibility to resolve conflicts involved in the resolution of significant claims and reflects the most logical interpretation of § 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code and other statutes, such as 11 U.S.C. § 549(c), which allow for other forms of retroactive stay relief. ... We cannot say that this was an abuse of discretion, particularly given the wide latitude accorded to the Bankruptcy Court to balance the equities when granting relief from the automatic stay.

Retroactive annulment of the automatic stay is unwarranted when the equities are not unusually compelling and annulment would penalize a mortgage creditor for relying on the stay.

Haughton v. Alipio (In Re Alipio) · filed 2007-11-29(d)

Although the facts presented here are unusual, the equities involved are not “unusually compelling.” To grant the motion would be to penalize MERS/Irwin for its reliance on the automatic stay to stay the foreclosure action. ... The court concludes that the parties seeking annulment of the stay have not met their burden of proof.

Section 362 permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay in exceptional circumstances when a creditor's innocent violation is accompanied by a debtor's inequitable delay in raising it.

In Re Coletta · filed 2007-12-17(d)

The stay should be annulled only in exceptional circumstances. ... Standing alone, the Movant’s lack of knowledge of the stay is not necessarily a sufficient basis for annulment. However, in this case, there is more. I find the Debtor chargeable with inequitable conduct. In particular, the Debtor allowed an inordinate period of time to pass before raising the violation of the automatic stay. This weighs heavily in favor of annulment of the stay.

Retroactive annulment of the automatic stay is a permissible remedy when an individual fails to comply with the prepetition credit counseling requirement of section 109(h).

Wyttenbach v. Commissioner · filed 2008-03-05

Furthermore, the Court finds that striking Appellant’s petition and retroactively annulling the automatic stay is a permissible remedy for non-compliance with section 109(h).

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate a tax sale when the absence of bankruptcy notice, lack of harm to the estate, and a secured creditor’s failure to protect its interest establish cause.

Litton Loan Servicing, LP v. Rockdale County (In Re Howard) · filed 2008-07-07(d)

Consideration of this factor, coupled with considerations of the notice issues and the status of the bankruptcy case itself, leads the Court to conclude that, applying either standard, the facts are “unusual and unusually compelling” and that cause exists to retroactively annul the stay and validate the sale of the Property to ALF. ... As an initial matter, the Court observes that the Debtor has no interest in the Property and it is of no value to the bankruptcy estate. ... Second, it is undisputed that neither Rockdale County nor ALF had notice of this bankruptcy case. ... Litton failed to record its interest, a responsibility so fundamental to property law and protection of its own interests, it is unnecessary to comment further.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate actions that otherwise would be void as stay violations.

In Re: Snyder · filed 2008-09-17(d)

By virtue of the term “annulling” being present in the statute, courts are empowered to grant retroactive relief, such as ratifying violations of the automatic stay that otherwise would be void.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay to validate a divorce decree when annulment preserves the stay’s debtor and creditor protections and respects state jurisdiction over domestic relations.

Williford v. Williford · filed 2008-09-24(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in annulling the automatic stay and, thereby, validating the divorce decree. ... The bankruptcy court ultimately granted Charlotte’s request, however, on the grounds that the instant situation did not disserve the dual purposes of the automatic stay and that the bankruptcy court was hesitant to interfere with the circuit court’s jurisdiction over family affairs.

Laches bars retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when a creditor unreasonably delays seeking relief and the delay prejudices another creditor.

In Re Magallanez · filed 2009-03-31(d)

The Court finds that the doctrine of laches bars LDS’s request to annul the stay. ... The Court finds that LDS’s delay in acknowledging its stay violation and its belated request for annulment constitutes an unreasonable lack of diligence on its part. Moreover, U.S. Bank has been compelled to expend fees and costs litigating this issue, both in the state foreclosure proceedings and in this Court. Hence, there is some prejudice to U.S. Bank. Accordingly, both elements of laches are present. Consequently, the Court finds that annulment of the stay is inappropriate in these circumstances.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of an automatic stay, ratifying actions that would otherwise be void.

In re Coletta · filed 2009-07-09(d)

Section 362(d)’s use of the term “annulling” means that a bankruptcy court is able to ratify violations of the automatic stay that would otherwise be void.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause when a creditor rerecords a lien without knowledge of the filing and the rerecording has little practical effect on the parties’ rights.

Hill v. Taylor (In Re Taylor) · filed 2009-12-03(d)

Further, cause exists for retroactive relief. As discussed above, the Deed of Trust, as originally recorded in 2007, already provided constructive notice, preventing a BFP from obtaining title to the Property free and clear of Bayview’s interest. Thus, the re-recording of the Deed of Trust to correct the typographical error in the block number had little practical impact on any party’s rights. The Court will annul the automatic stay and deny the Trustee’s request to declare the re-recording of the Deed of Trust a nullity.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause, based on the equitable factors relevant to the request.

In Re Marketxt Holdings, Corp. · filed 2010-04-15(d)(1)

The Bankruptcy Court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the Responsible Officer was entitled to retroactive annulment of the section 362 stay to allow the Award to stand.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to retroactively annul the automatic stay for cause, allowing an arbitration award entered during the stay to stand.

Chimera Capital, L.P. v. Nisselson · filed 2010-04-15(d)

The Bankruptcy Court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the Responsible Officer was entitled to retroactive annulment of the section 362 stay to allow the Award to stand.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when exceptional circumstances and the balance of equities warrant relief, including where the creditor lacked notice and the debtor acted inequitably.

Moore v. Complete Cash Holdings, LLC (In Re Moore) · filed 2011-03-31(d)

The Court has the authority under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) to grant relief from the automatic stay by annulling it retroactively. ... The facts of this case demonstrate extreme or exceptional circumstances that warrant retroactive relief from the stay and that a balancing of the equities requires such relief. Consequently, the Court will grant the Pawnbroker relief from the automatic stay by annulling it retroactively, effective as of the time it repossessed the vehicles.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, based on the equities of the case.

Arrow Road Construction Co. v. Bridgeview Bank Group (In Re Brittwood Creek, LLC) · filed 2011-06-02(d)

For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that § 362(d) provides the Bankruptcy Court with power to retroactively annul the automatic stay and the Bankruptcy Court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the equities favor retroactive relief.

A bankruptcy court’s retroactive annulment of the automatic stay can validate an order entered while the stay was in effect.

Williams Awning v. Workers'compensation · filed 2011-12-19

However, although actions taken in violation of a bankruptcy stay are void, a bankruptcy court may grant retroactive relief from a stay, and, in so doing, validate any orders or actions taken before the stay was annulled. Schwartz v. United States, 954 F.2d 569, 572-73 (9th Cir.1992); see also In re Myers, 491 F.3d 120, 127 (3d Cir.2007) ("this Court and others have held that actions in violation of the stay, although void (as opposed to voidable), may be revitalized in appropriate circumstances by retroactive annulment of the stay.") Here, although the Commission's initial order may have been void as entered in derogation of a bankruptcy stay, it was revitalized by the Bankruptcy Court's retroactive annulment of the stay.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the equities warrant it, including where an inadvertent stay violation caused no harm and the trustee does not object.

PHH Mortgage Corp. v. Cardiello (In Re Vitale) · filed 2012-04-02(d)

In a case such as this, where (1) no harm resulted from Movant’s actions, (2) the Chapter 7 Trustee has no objection to abandonment of the Property, and (3) the Debtor is eager for the foreclosure to be concluded, we find that, in balancing the equities, annulment of the stay is warranted.

Section 362(d)(1) allows a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause when a debtor unfairly uses the stay to avoid an unfavorable result.

In re Bazzi · filed 2012-10-12(d)(1)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), the Court may, among other things, “annul” the automatic stay “for cause.” The Court finds such cause here. ... The Court finds that, in this case, and with his Motion, the Debtor is attempting to use the automatic stay “unfairly as a shield to avoid an unfavorable result.” ... For the reasons stated in this opinion, the Court will enter an order denying Debtor’s Motion in its entirety, and annulling the automatic stay, retroactively to the September 11, 2012 petition date, so as to make clear that none of the actions Debtor complains of in the Motion may be deemed to be a violation of the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a court deciding whether cause exists to annul the automatic stay to balance the equities of the creditor and debtor.

In re: Michael Rene Rodarte · filed 2012-12-06(d)(1)

In analyzing whether “cause” exists to annul the stay under § 362(d)(1), the bankruptcy court is required to balance the equities of the creditor’s position in comparison to that of the debtor.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay only when extraordinary circumstances justify it, such as debtor bad faith or undue prejudice to a creditor.

In re Benchmark Capital, Inc. · filed 2013-04-09(d)(1)

Without any sort of substantive evidence that the Movant will be unduly prejudiced, coupled with the fact that the Debtor has not filed the case in bad faith or in an attempt to unjustly use the automatic stay as a shield, the court does not find that the required extraordinary circumstances are present to justify annulment of the automatic stay to validate the July 30, 2012 foreclosure sale.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay only when the creditor shows compelling circumstances.

In re Oncale · filed 2013-08-28(d)

Retroactive relief from the stay is appropriate only if a creditor can show compelling circumstances. ... Considering all of these factors and the allocation of the burden of proof necessary for the extraordinary relief GMAC seeks, the evidence does not indicate bad faith on the part of Debtor nor are there other grounds to retroactively annul the automatic stay.

Section 362 permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the creditor lacked notice, the debtor acted in bad faith, and equitable factors favor relief.

In re Cunningham · filed 2014-03-13(d)

Thus, Rossrock’s lack of notice, Cunningham’s mistakes and bad faith, and the other Stockwell factors, discussed above, support annulling the automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay, but a taxing authority’s actual knowledge of the bankruptcy and inadequate procedures can warrant denial, leaving its tax sale void.

In re Killmer · filed 2014-07-03(d)

The Court finds that Dutchess County had actual notice of this Debtor’s bankruptcy filing and that its policies and procedures are such that this situation could happen again if they are not changed. Thus, the factors and the equities weigh in favor of denying the County’s motion to annul the automatic stay. ... For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies Dutchess County’s motion to annul the automatic stay and as such, the Tax Sale that occurred while the stay was in effect is void ab initio.

In deciding whether to annul the automatic stay under § 362(d), action taken with knowledge of the bankruptcy weighs against annulment, while action taken in the reasonable belief that the stay had ended does not.

Gasprom, Inc. v. Fateh (In re Gasprom, Inc.) · filed 2014-07-29(d)

Taking any action (whether legal or illegal) against property of the estate while knowing of the bankruptcy and the automatic stay weighs against annulment; but taking action against property of the estate while under the reasonable belief that the stay had ended does not weigh against annulment.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the circumstances warrant it; a creditor need not satisfy every Stockwell factor.

In re Jean-Francois · filed 2014-09-29(d)

The Bankruptcy Court did not rely on the seventh Stockwell factor when making its decision to annul the automatic stay, but not every Stockwell factor must be met in order for the bankruptcy court to annul the stay.

Section 362 permits a bankruptcy court to annul an automatic stay retroactively, so a party cannot rely on that stay after annulment to challenge actions taken during it.

Meera Singh and Sam Houston v. Federal National Mortgage Association A/K/A Fannie Mae · filed 2014-12-05(d)

However, “[a] bankruptcy court may annul a stay to validate actions taken during the period of time covered by the stay,”16 and that is precisely what the federal court did in Houston’s bankruptcy case. ... Accordingly, appellants’ attempt to rely on the now-annulled bankruptcy stay is without merit.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay, which retroactively validates actions taken in violation of the stay as of the date they were taken.

Hartley v. Hartley · filed 2015-10-09(d)

The purpose of annulling the automatic stay clearly is to retroactively validate actions taken in violation of the stay, typically in situations in which the entity seeking the annulment was unaware of the bankruptcy proceeding.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when a balance of the equities supports it.

In re: Estavan Capital LLC · filed 2015-12-01(d)(1)

The record shows that the bankruptcy court correctly applied the balancing of equities test under Fjeldsted, without affording undue weight to any one factor. Therefore, we conclude the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in finding that cause existed for retroactive annulment of the stay to validate the foreclosure sale.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, validating an action taken while the stay was in effect.

In re Schumann · filed 2016-02-13(d)(1)

The automatic stay is retroactively annulled to March 29, 2011 for the purpose of validating the Summary and Default Judgment entered in the State Court Action.

Section 362(d) allows a bankruptcy court to retroactively validate a foreclosure sale by annulling the automatic stay for cause.

AP Siding & Roofing Co v. Bank of New York Mellon · filed 2016-03-28(d)

In this vein, a bankruptcy court can retroactively validate a foreclosure sale under Section 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code, as AP requested, if the party moving for relief can show “cause” for such extraordinary relief.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay, which can validate acts that otherwise would violate the stay.

Kvassay v. Kvassay · filed 2016-06-15(d)

Retroactive relief can validate acts that otherwise would violate the automatic stay.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, including when annulment resolves a claim against the debtor’s estate and allows litigation against other defendants to proceed.

In re Long · filed 2017-01-09(d)

Under § 362(d), a bankruptcy court may, for cause, terminate, annul, lift or condition the automatic stay. Though “cause” within the context of § 362(d) is undefined, it remains a broad concept which is intentionally flexible. ... Since voluntary dismissals do not violate the automatic stay, and because the annulment of the stay accomplished a complete resolution of the claim or potential claim against Debtor Long’s estate, this Court found that annulment of the stay was warranted.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when the equities favor relief, including prejudice to a licensor from continued application of the stay after it becomes clear that its license will not be assigned.

In re Rupari Holding Corp. · filed 2017-08-18(d)(1)

Upon review of the totality of the circumstances and weighing the equities in this case, I conclude that as of May 2, 2017, it was clear to both parties that the License Agreement was not being assigned as part of the sale of substantially all of the Debtors’ assets. At that point in time, the uncertainty arid prejudice to Roma arising from the continued application of the automatic stay to the trademarks weigh in favor of annulling the automatic stay as of that date.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay after the court balances all the circumstances, including notice of the stay and inequitable conduct by the debtor.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. 1278 Village Run Trust (In re 1278 Village Run Trust) · filed 2017-10-10(d)

This Court agrees with Howard and Cruz that requests to annul the stay are sui generis, and require a close examination of all of the facts. Important to that examination, but not by themselves determinative, are whether the party requesting the annulment was aware of the stay, and whether the debtor has engaged in inequitable conduct. Cruz, at 603; Howard, at 518. In the end, the Court has to “balance the equities”, or look at the “totality of the circumstances”, to determine whether the stay should be annulled nunc pro tunc. ... ORDERED that the Stay Motion is GRANTED, and the automatic stay is hereby ANULLED nunc pro tunc to the Filing Date.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively, validating an action filed while the stay was in effect.

Coy Cox, Jr. v. Specialty Vehicle Solutions · filed 2017-11-14(d)

First, a bankruptcy court may exercise its unique statutory power to “grant relief from the stay . . . such as by terminating, annulling, modifying, or conditioning such stay.” 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) (emphasis added); Easley, 990 F.2d at 909–10. “This power to annul permits the order to operate retroactively, thus validating actions taken by a party at a time when he was unaware of the stay.” Easley, 990 F.2d at 910 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

Section 362(d)(1) permits annulment of the automatic stay for cause, determined by balancing the equities.

In re Leeds · filed 2018-08-01(d)(1)

Whether "cause" exists under Section 362(d)(1) to annul the stay is determined under a "balancing of the equities" test.

Section 362(d) allows retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause, but that relief is extraordinary and appropriate only in rare instances.

Manuela Q. Franco and Associated Case in US District Court · filed 2019-08-23(d)

Stay annulment is extraordinary relief, to be awarded only in rare instances.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of an automatic stay, validating a sale that otherwise would be void for violating the stay.

SFR INV.'S POOL 1, LLC VS. U.S. BANK, N.A. · filed 2019-09-26(d)

Therefore, the effect of SFR obtaining a retroactive annulment of the stay is that the otherwise void HOA sale, which violated the stay at the time it was made, is now valid.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay despite a creditor’s knowledge of the bankruptcy filing when the equities favor annulment.

In re: Aki T. Oya · filed 2019-10-18(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court could grant retroactive annulment of the automatic stay despite Wells Fargo's knowledge of the bankruptcy case prior to the foreclosure sale, and the court did not clearly err in finding that Wells Fargo's knowledge was outweighed by Aki's inequitable conduct under National Environmental Waste Corporation and Fjeldsted.

Section 362(d)(1) allows retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when the debtor filed in bad faith.

In Re: David Newton · filed 2020-05-26(d)(1)

Here, as the Bankruptcy Court found, there was ample evidence of Debtor’s bad faith. Accordingly, nunc pro tunc relief from the automatic stay was appropriate on this basis alone.

Section 362(d) authorizes bankruptcy courts to annul the automatic stay retroactively, treating it as if it had never existed.

In re: Shawne Merriman · filed 2020-07-13(d)

Congress’ decision to deploy four verbs to describe the various ways in which a bankruptcy court might grant relief from stay indicates an express decision to grant bankruptcy courts the broadest possible range of options in respect of the stay, including annulling it, which has the effect of treating it as if it had never existed.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when equitable factors, including a creditor’s lack of notice and unfair prejudice from enforcing the stay, favor relief.

Linora Felix Gonzalez · filed 2020-07-28(d)

On these grounds, where Creditor had no notice of Debtor’s bankruptcy and where it would suffer unfair prejudice should the automatic stay be imposed, the balance of equities swings in Creditor’s favor. Accordingly, annulment of the stay is appropriate.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, including inequitable debtor conduct, thereby ratifying actions taken in violation of the stay.

Marguerite Potter · filed 2021-09-30(d)

It was well within this Court’s discretion and authority to sua sponte reopen this case and Cumberland County has met its burden of proof for the Court to grant its motion to annul the automatic stay and ratify actions in violation of the stay. The Stay Motion will be granted. Under both the balancing of the equities and bad faith analysis, stay relief is appropriate.

Retroactive annulment of the automatic stay requires the movant to show that the balance of the equities justifies relief.

Marilynn Lynn Thomason · filed 2021-11-17(d)

Because the Court concludes that Trust has not demonstrated that the balancing of the equities justifies retroactive annulment of the automatic stay in this case and under these facts, its motion will be denied in this respect.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the circumstances warrant it under either an exceptional-circumstances or a balancing-of-the-equities test.

Charles Paul Walker · filed 2022-02-15(d)

The facts here present the type of limited circumstances that warrant annulment of the stay, regardless of whether the Court applies an “exceptional circumstances” test or a “balancing of the equities” test.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay for cause when the circumstances warrant retroactive relief.

Rajesh C Patel · filed 2022-06-23(d)(1)

Having considered all the evidence and arguments, the Court agrees with the HP that the facts here present the type of limited circumstances that warrant annulment of the stay, regardless of whether the Court applies an "exceptional circumstances" test or a "balancing of the equities" test.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause, validating actions taken while the stay was in effect.

Thornhill Brothers Fitness, LLC · filed 2022-07-08(d)(1)

Given the strange and unusual circumstances of this case and the court finding that Debtor has met its burden of proof, the court finds that there is cause to annul the stay. The actions taken in the state court litigation are hereby validated.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to retroactively annul the automatic stay for cause.

Anytime Fitness L L C v. Thornhill Brothers Fitness L L C · filed 2022-11-07(d)(1)

Title 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) allows courts to retroactively annul the automatic stay where there exists “cause” to do so.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of an automatic stay for cause, removing its effect without erasing its existence.

ARMANDO NATERA · filed 2022-11-16(d)(1)

For good cause appearing, and for the reasons stated below, the Wards’ motion will be GRANTED and the automatic stay retroactively annulled as to the Wards effective October 25, 2017. This ruling will annul the effect of the automatic stay only, but not its existence.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to annul the automatic stay for cause, effective from an earlier date, to allow state court orders implementing an enforceable settlement.

Jandava Denise Cattron · filed 2023-05-23(d)(1)

In the alternative, even if the Stay Relief Order could be interpreted not to grant stay relief to permit these provisions in the April 6, 2023 Order, this Court finds that cause exists to annul the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), effective as of the date of the Stay Relief Order, to permit these provisions.

Section 362(d)(1) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay for cause when creditors lacked notice of the bankruptcy and would suffer prejudice if the stay remained in place.

Hoyt Norman Kelley · filed 2023-07-21(d)(1)

Therefore, because the Movants were not aware of the bankruptcy case and would suffer prejudice were the stay not annulled, the Court finds cause to annul the stay as to the Movants’ personal injury case.

A court may deny retroactive annulment of the automatic stay after weighing the equities, including whether creditors knew of the bankruptcy before foreclosure.

In Re: Sarah Hoover v. Phh Mortgage Corporation · filed 2023-09-08(d)

We review for abuse of discretion the decision on the motion to annul the automatic stay. ... Defendants had notice of Plaintiff’s bankruptcy filing before the foreclosure sale took place, and the bankruptcy court committed no legal error or abuse of discretion when weighing the equities.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively and thereby relinquish exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy estate property.

In re Andrei V Medvedev · filed 2023-09-29(d)

To the contrary, it is well-settled in the Ninth Circuit that a bankruptcy court may retroactively annul an automatic stay and thereby relinquish exclusive jurisdiction over the bankruptcy estate.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the creditor would have qualified for stay relief before acting and additional circumstances warrant annulment.

Ikechukwu H. Okorie · filed 2024-02-12(d)

But the stay is annulled, as PriorityOne requests, for two reasons. First, stay relief would have been granted before the foreclosure if PriorityOne had sought that relief. Second, PriorityOne has established additional facts that warrant annulment.

Section 362(d) allows retroactive annulment of the automatic stay when the totality of the circumstances favors it.

John Karl Youse · filed 2024-02-13(d)

The interests of justice in this case require the court to examine whether annulment of the stay is appropriate. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances as required by Fjelstad, it clearly is.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay when creditors conduct a foreclosure sale without notice of the bankruptcy and the equities favor leaving the sale in place.

Latanya Buggs · filed 2024-11-21(d)

Based upon the undisputed facts before the Court, it is clear to the Court that the stay must be annulled as to AAM and ETC since they did not have notice of the stay at the time the foreclosure sale occurred.

Section 362(d) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively for cause and validate a postpetition foreclosure sale.

Sampson v. The Estate of Richard Inglett · filed 2025-02-21(d)

In appropriate circumstances, §362(d) expressly authorizes the Court to grant relief from the stay by “terminating, annulling, modifying, or conditioning” it for cause. ... Mr. Sampson does not challenge the Court’s authority to annul the stay, and given the particular facts of this case, the Court finds Inglett is entitled to an annulment of the stay and validation of the foreclosure sale.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of an automatic stay for cause or when the debtor lacks equity in estate property that is unnecessary to an effective reorganization.

Okorie v. Lentz · filed 2025-02-25(d)

As the district court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that retroactive annulment of the stay was warranted under both bases provided in § 362(d), we see no reason to disturb the district court’s affirmance of that decision.

Section 362(d) permits retroactive annulment of an automatic stay when the circumstances warrant relief, based on the relevant factors considered together.

Morozov v. Hancock Whitney Bank · filed 2025-03-07(d)

However, 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) “authorizes the annulment of [an automatic] stay nunc pro tunc to the date of the petition, provided that the circumstances of the particular case warrant such relief.” In re Barr, 318 B.R. 592, 598 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2004) (emphasis added). ... Here, reviewing all of the factors in their totality, the Court readily concludes that the Bankruptcy Court did not err in finding that the automatic stay should be annulled.

Section 362(d)(1) permits annulment of an automatic stay, with the creditor’s knowledge of the bankruptcy filing and the debtor’s bad faith relevant to that decision.

Bassett v. SAC Fund II 0826, LLC · filed 2025-08-04(d)(1)

Additionally, two important factors a court must consider when deciding whether to annul an automatic stay are “(1) if the creditor had actual or constructive knowledge of the bankruptcy filing and, therefore, of the stay, [and] (2) if the debtor has acted in bad faith.” In re WorldCom, Inc., 325 B.R. 511, 521 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005) (AJG). These are the factors that the Bankruptcy Court considered in evaluating Appellant’s motion to vacate.

Section 362(d) permits a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay for cause, giving retroactive effect to actions taken while the stay was in force.

In re Mauro Sierra Nava, Sr. · filed 2025-12-02(d)

Section 362(d) expressly authorizes the Court to annul the automatic stay for cause.

Section 362 permits annulment of the automatic stay to validate a foreclosure sale when the debtors were disqualified from commencing the bankruptcy case.

In Re Pappalardo · filed 1990-01-29

2. The Alliance motion to annul the automatic stay imposed under 11 U.S.C. § 362 so as to validate the foreclosure sale is granted because the debtors were disqualified from commencing their Chapter 13 case on October 19, 1989, as proscribed under 11 U.S.C. § 109(g)(1).

Section 362 allows a bankruptcy court to annul the automatic stay retroactively to permit a creditor to exercise a right of setoff.

In Re: William Reid Thompson, Debtor. William Reid Thompson v. Board of Trustees of the Fairfax County Police Officers R · filed 1996-08-02

Second, Thompson asserts that the bankruptcy court had no discretion to annul the automatic stay. ... Having reviewed the lower court opinions, the record, and the briefs and materials submitted by the parties, we conclude that the district court committed no error. Accordingly, we affirm on the thorough opinions of the bankruptcy court, see Thompson v. Board of Trustees, 182 B.R. 140 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1995), and the district court.

Section 362(d) permits a court to annul the automatic stay retroactively to validate an earlier act when the circumstances warrant it.

In Re Hoffinger Industries, Inc. · filed 2002-02-28(d)

Having determined that the automatic stay may be retroactively annulled so as to validate an action taken previously, the issue remains whether these are the appropriate circumstances to exercise such equitable power. The answer to this question requires an affirmative answer.

Section 362(d) permits annulment of the automatic stay to validate an action filed while the stay was in effect.

West v. Men's Focus Health Centers of Georgia, Inc. · filed 2001-08-03(d)

As we interpret the order granting the Wests’ motion for relief from the automatic bankruptcy stay in this case, the federal court annulled the stay so as to validate the medical malpractice action previously filed by the Wests.