11 U.S.C. § 362

Section 362 permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a pending state court constructive trust claim must be resolved to determine whether property belongs to the bankruptcy estate, and that court can resolve the claim more quickly and fairly.

Smithfield Trust Co. v. Pitchford (In Re Pitchford) · filed 2009-08-27(d)(1)

The Court concludes that stay relief is appropriate because (a) Smithfield, as set forth above, has established cause for such stay relief (i.e., this Court’s need to determine whether the Debtor’s Residence constitutes property of the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate or, instead, does not constitute bankruptcy estate property pursuant to § 541(d)), (b) the issue of whether Smithfield should get its constructive trust can be resolved much more expeditiously in the Orphans Court, and (c) it is eminently more fair to the parties that the Orphans Court resolve the constructive trust issue.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the stay for eviction based on a claimed prepetition lease termination when the landlord has not established that the lease was terminated before the petition.

In Re Everest Crossing, LLC · filed 2009-09-17(d)(1)

As to the motion for relief under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), the foregoing leads to the inescapable conclusion that the Landlord has not established the “cause” on which it relies: that the Lease was terminated prepetition. Therefore, the Motion for Relief is DENIED.

Section 362(d)(1) permits limited stay relief for cause so pending litigation can determine the debtor’s liability in another forum when judicial economy and the parties’ burdens favor doing so.

In Re Coachworks Holdings, Inc. · filed 2009-10-19(d)(1)

In these circumstances, the best option is to allow Mr. Ellerbee to move forward with his complaint against all defendants in one forum. Because the Bankruptcy Court has no jurisdiction over the non-debtor defendants, the district court is the forum in the best position to vindicate all the parties’ rights — including their rights to a jury trial — in one proceeding. Therefore, the Court will grant stay relief for the purpose of establishing Debtor’s liability, if any, to Mr. Ellerbee.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to allow arbitration of a creditor’s claim when the relevant circumstances favor arbitration.

In Re Consolidated Fgh Liquidating Trust · filed 2009-11-06(d)(1)

Taking the applicable factors as a whole, the Court considers that they weigh in favor of arbitration. Moreover, given that the arbitration board would act as a specialized tribunal with expertise on the matters in this case, and given the strong policy toward favoring arbitration where the parties contracted for the right to arbitrate, the Court concludes, in consideration of all of the circumstances of this case, that the criteria necessary for the Court to lift the stay for cause under § 362(d)(1) have been established.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to let pending litigation proceed in another forum when the debtor faces no material prejudice or hardship and the movant shows some probability of success.

Tribune Media Services, Inc. v. Beatty (In Re Tribune Co.) · filed 2009-11-09(d)(1)

For the reasons stated above, I conclude that the Debtors will not suffer prejudice if the 2008 California Action proceeds, because the Debtors have indicated a willingness, and indeed a preference, to resolve this issue promptly. I also conclude that the Debtors will not suffer any material hardship in litigating the matter in California that outweighs the slight economic and strategic hardship Beatty would suffer if the stay is not lifted and the matter is litigated in this Court. Finally, Beatty’s exhibits provide a sufficient basis to find a slight showing of a probability of success on the merits. Accordingly, the Stay Motion will be granted. An appropriate order follows.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor continues to default on a lease after filing and fails to show it can assume the lease.

In Re Ramreddy, Inc. · filed 2009-11-09(d)(1)

That finding, combined with the Debtor’s ongoing post-petition default of its obligations under the Lease, see 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(3), constitute “cause” under § 362(d)(1) to grant Getty relief to pursue its in rem remedies under applicable state law to recover possession of the Premises.

Under § 362(d)(1), a minor, curable payment default under a confirmed Chapter 13 plan does not establish cause to lift the automatic stay.

In Re Dumbuya · filed 2009-12-10(d)(1)

Moreover, since, as already explained, the Debtors’ default in payment under the terms of their plan is not material, and with the Debtors having the means by which to cure the default, the Court cannot find that “cause” exists to relieve the automatic stay pursuant to § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to enforce a prebankruptcy unlawful detainer judgment that terminated and forfeited the debtor’s lease.

Ducharme v. JR Capital Group (In re Ducharme) · filed 2009-12-14(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by granting relief from the automatic stay to allow JR to enforce a state court unlawful detainer judgment declaring the rental agreement between Duc-harme and JR terminated and forfeited.

Section 362(d)(1) permits modifying the automatic stay for cause to allow a state court appeal to resolve a property title dispute when judicial economy and comity favor that course.

In Re Lee · filed 2009-12-21(d)(1)

The Court agrees that cause exists pursuant to § 362(d)(1), and finds that in the interests of judicial economy and comity, the automatic stay is modified to allow for completion of the state court appellate proceedings.

A chapter 7 debtor’s failure to amend a statement of intention to reaffirm a debt secured by retained real property or surrender the property is cause for relief from the automatic stay.

Habersham Bank v. Harris (In Re Harris) · filed 2010-01-15(d)(1)

Should Debtor fail to amend his Statement of Intention according to the terms of this order, the Court will enter an order granting relief from the stay for “cause.”

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor cannot comply with a confirmed plan.

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Freeman (In Re Freeman) · filed 2010-02-10(d)(1)

Moreover, Debtor’s inability to comply with the confirmed plan constitutes “cause” for granting relief from stay.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a creditor seeking relief from the automatic stay to prove cause, which can include lack of adequate protection.

In Re Timmer · filed 2010-02-17(d)(1)

In order to succeed under § 362(d)(1), Veridian must prove that cause exists to allow it to foreclose on Debtors’ homestead, which can include the lack of adequate protection.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a franchise agreement is not subject to assumption.

In Re Tornado Pizza, LLC · filed 2010-04-09(d)(1)

Relief from stay is one remedy available to a franchisor when the franchise agreement is not subject to assumption.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to let pending state court litigation resolve lease disputes, while execution of an eviction warrant may require a further bankruptcy court order.

In Re Project Orange Associates, LLC · filed 2010-07-01(d)(1)

The Court concludes that cause exists to lift the automatic stay to permit the state court to decide the matters pending before it in the several state court actions commenced by Syracuse or Project Orange. However, in the event that Syracuse prevails and the state court issues a warrant of eviction, the warrant may not be executed absent further order of this Court.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor files a bankruptcy case in bad faith.

In Re Wgmjr, Inc. · filed 2010-08-09(d)(1)

The absence of good faith constitutes cause for lifting of the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the movant is likely to own the property it seeks to use or control.

In Re Northwest 15th Street Associates · filed 2010-08-26(d)(1)

Consequently, as the likely owner of the Plans, Ewing should be able to use and control those Plans. These findings establish that “cause” exists for relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to weigh judicial economy when deciding whether cause exists to lift the automatic stay, including whether to defer relief without prejudice while a related appeal is pending.

In Re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. · filed 2010-08-27(d)(1)

In light of the fact that the Bankruptcy Court denied the motion without prejudice in an attempt to defer to the Ninth Circuit, judicial economy weighed significantly in favor of the Bankruptcy Court’s decision.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause so a party can pursue appropriate relief in state court.

In Re Combs · filed 2010-09-03(d)(1)

Mytnick’s motion for relief from the automatic stay will be granted, to permit Mytnick to pursue appropriate relief in the state court.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to let a divorce action proceed through judgment while reserving enforcement for the bankruptcy court.

In Re Taub · filed 2010-10-08(d)(1)

For these reasons, and based on the entire record, the Court finds that Mr. Taub has shown that there is cause for relief from the automatic stay, to permit the parties to proceed in the Second Divorce Action to conclusion and the entry of judgment, with enforcement to take place in this Court.

Section 362(d)(1) allows a bankruptcy court to lift the automatic stay for cause so a creditor can adjudicate and liquidate claims in state court.

Barnett v. Osborne (In Re Osborne) · filed 2010-10-19(d)(1)

This Court has discretion to grant stay relief for cause. 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). Stay relief is due to be granted to allow Plaintiffs to return to the State Court to adjudicate and liquidate their State Court causes of action against the Debtors.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a prepetition foreclosure sale has left the debtor with only bare legal title, so the creditor may complete the sale and take possession.

In Re Madison · filed 2010-11-03(d)(1)

Where debtor has been divested of all but bare legal title through a foreclosure sale, cause exists to grant relief from the automatic stay to permit Creditor to conclude any act remaining in the sale process and take possession of the property.

Section 362(d)(1) requires cause for each specific action for which relief from the automatic stay is sought, so a court may allow divorce claims to proceed while keeping the stay in place for a property sale and related contempt proceeding.

In Re Chandler · filed 2010-12-17(d)(1)

Relief from stay is not an all or nothing endeavor. Cause must exist for each action for which relief is sought.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when keeping the stay would disadvantage a creditor seeking to reduce a verdict to judgment and assert a setoff, with little prejudice to the debtor.

In Re Abc Learning Centres Ltd. · filed 2011-01-21(d)(1)

The imposition of the automatic stay would place RCS at a disadvantage, thereby prompting the Court to exercise its discretion to grant stay relief to RCS.

Under § 362(d)(1), a creditor whose only interest in estate property is an unperfected security interest susceptible to avoidance does not establish entitlement to relief from the automatic stay.

In Re Aleris International, Inc. · filed 2011-01-31(d)(1)

Here, Holt has not demonstrated that it is entitled to relief from stay because its Article 2 security interest in the Equipment, which is its only interest in the Equipment, is unperfected and thus susceptible to avoidance by the Debtor, which would thereafter leave Holt with only an unsecured claim.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when post-petition mortgage arrears and declining property value threaten the creditor’s interest.

In Re Lopez · filed 2011-02-09(d)(1)

I would still find sufficient cause exists under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) to warrant relief from stay in light of the post-petition arrears and the declining value of the Property in comparison to the increasing claims.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to lift the automatic stay for cause through a case-by-case exercise of discretion.

Jim's Maintenance & Sons Inc. v. Target Corporation · filed 2011-04-01(d)(1)

Relief from the automatic stay may be granted for cause, see 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), which involves a discretionary determination by the bankruptcy court made on a case by case basis.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor cannot redeem tax-sold property before the redemption period expires and has no equity in it.

In Re Gibson · filed 2011-05-26(d)(1)

Debtor’s inability to redeem the property, coupled with her lack of equity in the property, constitutes cause to grant Wells relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when postconfirmation mortgage defaults cannot be cured through a permissible Chapter 13 plan modification.

In Re Long · filed 2011-07-14(d)(1)

However, the post-confirmation amendment process under Section 1329 does not permit Debtors a second chance to use Chapter 13 as a means to alter what otherwise are Cendant’s rights under its agreement to foreclose on its mortgage. Therefore, cause exists under Section 362(d)(1) to lift the automatic stay so that Cendant may proceed with those rights.

Section 362(d)(1) does not require relief from the stay to compel arbitration when arbitration would sever an issue from a core avoidance action and bind creditors who did not agree to arbitrate.

In Re Salander O'Reilly Galleries · filed 2011-07-18(d)(1)

Kraken has failed to establish cause for relief from the stay for the following reasons: 1. Arbitration of whether the Botticelli was property of the debtor or property of the estate would improperly sever an element of the § 544 action; and 2. Other creditors — the Trust as hypothetical judicial lien creditor and as assignee of the Bank — were not parties to the consignment agreement and thus are not bound by the Jersey Law Clause, either with respect to arbitration or the choice of Jersey law.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide relief from the automatic stay for cause when a creditor lacks a colorable secured claim and the disputed property remains in the estate.

In Re Inofin, Inc. · filed 2011-07-27(d)(1)

In short, RCG failed to establish a colorable claim to secured status and concomitantly failed to establish entitlement to relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause, including inadequate protection, with cause decided case by case.

State Bank v. Miller (In Re Miller) · filed 2011-10-05(d)(1)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) a party in interest may obtain relief from stay by showing “cause,” including the lack of adequate protection in property of such a party in interest. “Cause” for relief from stay is not defined by § 362(d)(1). Therefore, “courts must determine whether discretionary relief is appropriate on a case-by-case basis.”

Section 362(d)(1) permits a party in interest to obtain relief from the automatic stay for cause, including lack of adequate protection.

In Re: Richard Miller V. · filed 2011-10-05(d)(1)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) a party in interest may obtain relief from stay by showing “cause,” including the lack of adequate protection in property of such a party in interest.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor substantially defaults on direct mortgage payments required by a confirmed Chapter 13 plan.

In Re Neals · filed 2011-10-06(d)(1)

This Court finds that Debtors’ failure to make any direct payments to ASC since the filing of their petition almost a year ago constitutes a substantial default of them obligations under the terms of the ... chapter 13 plan and the Note and Mortgage, and thus constitutes cause for relief from the automatic stay under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor claims rights under a lease assigned to it in violation of the lease terms.

In re: ik/s-bar, LLC · filed 2011-10-06(d)(1)

We conclude that, on this record, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in granting relief from stay under § 362(d)(1) because the Lease was assigned to IK/S in violation of its terms.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when continuing state law litigation in state court serves judicial economy and the debtor remains adequately protected.

Lee v. Anasti · filed 2012-01-06(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in granting Anasti relief from the stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, and courts apply the relevant Sonnax factors when a request for relief turns on an administrative agency’s primary jurisdiction.

In Re Containership Co.(tcc) A/S · filed 2012-02-10(d)(1)

This twelve factor test also applies where a lift stay motion involves consideration of whether an administrative agency has primary jurisdiction over the dispute.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for an unsecured creditor when special circumstances, such as the value of litigating related claims against multiple defendants in one forum, establish cause.

O'Neal Steel, Inc. v. Chatkin (In re Chatkin) · filed 2012-02-17(d)(1)

This Court agrees, and under the specific facts of the present case, as discussed above, finds that the Movants have shown special circumstances and met their burden of showing prima facie cause under Section 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to allow insurers to pay insured individuals’ defense costs under policies in which the debtor may have an interest.

In Re MF Global Holdings Ltd. · filed 2012-04-10(d)(1)

Assuming that the Debtors do have an interest in the proceeds of the Policies, MFG Assurance and U.S. Specialty have adequately shown that cause exists to the lift the automatic stay to permit advancement or reimbursement of the Individual Insureds’ defense costs pursuant to the Policies.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor fails to make postpetition mortgage payments and does not rebut the creditor’s showing of delinquency.

In re Fennell · filed 2012-05-02(d)(1)

Here, the Debtor has introduced no evidence to contradict Sundaram’s assertion that she is delinquent on her mortgage payments. In addition, the Debtor failed to comply with the order of this Court dated January 25, 2012, directing her to file a schedule indicating that the mortgage ar-rearages have been deposited into escrow. Thus, Sundaram has made, at the very least, a prima facie showing that “cause” exists to lift the stay, and the Debtor has not contravened this showing or met her burden by introducing evidence to establish otherwise. Accordingly, the standard under § 362(d)(1) is met to lift the automatic stay to allow Sundaram to pursue its available rights and remedies with respect to the Property.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a creditor seeking stay relief to exercise setoff to establish a right to setoff under nonbankruptcy law and satisfy § 553’s conditions.

In Re Wl Homes LLC · filed 2012-05-16(d)(1)

Showing cause requires the creditor to first establish its right to setoff by finding an independent right of setoff under non-bankruptcy law. It then must show that the conditions § 553 places on setoff are satisfied.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when letting pending state litigation proceed serves judicial economy and an expeditious, economical resolution.

Passavant Memorial Homes v. Laurel Highlands Foundation, Inc. (In re Laurel Highlands Foundation, Inc.) · filed 2012-06-12(d)(1)

Judge Marsili’s experience and knowledge of this case and the fact that he is prepared to rule on an important matter at this time lead this Court to conclude that the interests of judicial economy and the expeditious and economical resolution of litigation are best served by granting relief from stay.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the automatic stay to pursue an environmental injunction when the movant has no viable cause of action under the environmental statutes it invokes.

Flintkote Co. v. 8 East Frederick Place, LLC (In re Flintkote Co.) · filed 2012-07-06(d)(1)

Therefore, 8 East Frederick has not established cause for relief from stay and is not entitled to injunctive relief as a matter of law.

Section 362(d)(1) does not warrant lifting the stay to permit arbitration when the arbitration clause does not apply to the dispute with the bankruptcy trustee.

Kraken Investments Ltd. v. Jacobs (In re Salander-O'reilly Galleries, LLC) · filed 2012-07-10(d)(1)

The Bankruptcy Court correctly held that in sorting out the rights to the Botticelli as between Kraken and the Trustee, those clauses did not apply, arbitration was thus not appropriate, and the lifting of the stay to allow for arbitration was therefore not warranted.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the automatic stay to terminate a contract when the claimed default is failure to meet a nonbinding target.

Velo Holdings Inc. v. Paymentech, LLC (In re Velo Holdings Inc.) · filed 2012-07-18(d)(1)

For the reasons explained below, the Court finds that the failure to meet the 50 BP Metric does not constitute “cause” under section 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the estate is diminishing and there is no reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation.

In re 51-53 West 129th Street HDFC, Inc. · filed 2012-07-19(d)(1)

Here, the City has adequately demonstrated in the Motion that cause exists for stay relief based on diminution of the estate and absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation under section 1112(b)(4)(A), which applies in this case under section 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause so a prepetition state court proceeding may continue when doing so causes no prejudice to the bankruptcy estate.

In re Lehigh Valley Properties, Inc. · filed 2012-11-02(d)(1)

I find and conclude that no prejudice would result to Debtor's bankruptcy estate if the condemnation proceeding continues in the state court where it originated because the impact on the bankruptcy estate would be no different whether the condemnation proceeding were decided in state court or in this court. ... Under these facts, relief from the automatic stay based on "cause” under section 362(d)(1) is entirely appropriate.

Section 362(d)(1) does not warrant lifting the automatic stay for a tax purchaser when a Chapter 13 plan provides payment of the lien and adequately protects the purchaser’s rights.

In re Lamont · filed 2012-12-27(d)(1)

For these reasons, the Court finds that a tax purchaser’s rights are adequately protected when payment of the lien is provided for in the Chapter 13 plan. Therefore, modification of the stay for cause under § 362(d) is not appropriate.

Section 362(d)(1) does not require relief from the automatic stay for lack of adequate protection when Chapter 13 plans provide for payment of tax liens and protect the tax purchasers’ interests.

In re Romious · filed 2013-01-18(d)(1)

The Court adopts the District Court’s reasoning in LaMont and finds that the tax purchasers’ rights are adequately protected because payment of the tax liens is provided for in the chapter 13 plans. ... Therefore, modification of the stay for cause under § 362(d) is not appropriate, and the motions will be denied.

An asserted inability to propose a confirmable plan does not establish cause to lift the automatic stay when the debtor’s plan is confirmable.

Western Real Estate Equities, L.L.C. v. Village at Camp Bowie I, L.P. (In Re Village at Camp Bowie I, L.P.) · filed 2013-02-26(d)(1)

In addition to challenging plan confirmation, Western seeks to appeal the bankruptcy court’s order denying its § 362(d) motion to lift the stay. Western reasons that the Village cannot satisfy § 1129(a)(10) without recourse to impermissible artificial impairment, and that its patent inability to propose a confirmable plan constitutes cause that warrants lifting the stay. As we have concluded that the bankruptcy court did not err in confirming the Village’s plan, Western’s theory of cause necessarily also fails.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor prosecutes its bankruptcy case in bad faith.

In re Mantachie Apartment Homes, LLC · filed 2013-03-12(d)(1)

Accordingly, the stay is due to be lifted for cause under § 362(d)(1), for the Debtors’ bad faith during these bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a chapter 7 trustee does not seek to preserve the stay to administer the property.

In re Yelverton · filed 2013-07-16(d)(1)

The trustee’s decision not to seek to bar relief from the stay in order to deal with the property in his administration of the estate additionally constitutes cause under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) to permit the bank to pursue its alleged interest in the property.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor has no reasonable prospect of a confirmable reorganization plan, particularly after prolonged nonpayment and unsupported income projections.

In re Doug Wilson Insurance Agency, Inc. · filed 2013-07-16(d)(1)

The Debtor has failed to show any reasonable possibility that a plan of reorganization can be confirmed. The evidence establishes that First Security has for the reasons stated herein established cause under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) for granting relief from the automatic stay; therefore, it is unnecessary to decide the assignment of rents issue.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a court deciding whether cause exists to lift the stay to balance the harm to the debtor and the moving party and consider the public interest.

In re City of Detroit · filed 2013-11-06(d)(1)

Accordingly, in balancing the competing interests to determine whether there is cause for relief from the stay, the Court will consider both the harm to the City if the motion is granted and the harm to the NAACP plaintiffs if the motion is denied. In addition, the Court concludes that it is appropriate to consider the public interest in this context, just as it was appropriate to consider the public interest when determining whether to extend the stay when the City requested it.

Under § 362(d)(1), a movant bears the initial burden of showing cause to lift the automatic stay.

In re Residential Capital, LLC · filed 2013-11-19(d)(1)

Under section 362(d)(1), Sweeting bears the initial burden of showing “cause” to lift the stay.

Significant missed postpetition mortgage payments required by a confirmed Chapter 13 plan constitute cause for relief from the automatic stay.

CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Borm · filed 2014-04-02(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court abused its discretion by denying the Creditor’s request for stay relief in light of the Debtors’ failure to comply with their obligations under their plan (and therefore, the relevant loan documents), by being significantly behind in their payments to the Creditor.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor fails to propose a feasible plan.

In re Gundrum · filed 2014-04-03(d)(1)

Cause under § 362(d)(1) is not limited to a lack of adequate protection or a finding of bad faith and can exist when a debtor fails to propose a feasible plan.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a chapter 11 case was filed in bad faith.

In re Mense · filed 2014-04-15(d)(1)

Good faith is required in the commencement and prosecution of a chapter 11 case, and the lack thereof constitutes “cause” for dismissal under § 1112(b)(1) and relief from the automatic stay under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to pursue litigation in another forum, with likely success on the merits considered when relief would directly and substantially affect the debtor.

Midwest Motor Supply Co. v. Hruby (In re Hruby) · filed 2014-05-19(d)(1)

However, the granting of relief can be expected to directly and substantially impact the Debtor and the parties did address the likelihood of the Movant’s success on the merits in their offers of proof. The Court finds, in this case, the holding in Gindi requires it to assess the likelihood that the Movant will succeed on the merits of its State Court litigation before granting relief.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause based on the specific hardships to the debtor, the estate, and the party seeking relief.

In re Archdiocese of Milwaukee · filed 2014-06-05(d)(1)

The Court concludes that the cost and distraction suffered by the Debtor and the estate along with the potential prejudice to the abuse survivors outweighs the prejudice to OneBeacon caused by the additional delay in reaching a final determination from the Wisconsin Supreme Court on this important insurance coverage issue.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the bankruptcy court cannot adjudicate the merits of a personal injury claim that must be tried in district court.

Barber v. Arnott (In re Arnott) · filed 2014-07-11(d)(1)

This fact alone constitutes sufficient cause to lift the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits modification of the automatic stay for cause to let a pending state court proceeding adjudicate interests in post-marital community property, while the bankruptcy court retains jurisdiction over distribution.

In re Guzman · filed 2014-07-14(d)(1)

The court finds that there is cause to modify the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). ... The court hereby modifies the automatic stay for the PR Court of First Instance (Case No. KAC 2012-1222) to proceed adjudicating the property interests of the Debtor and his ex-wife Creditor Viscal Rodriguez in their post-marital community property. This court, however, retains exclusive jurisdiction over the distribution of such property.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the bankruptcy court cannot liquidate the underlying claims and the circumstances favor litigation in another court.

In re Mason · filed 2014-08-07(d)(1)

There is sufficient “cause” to grant Lee and Perry’s request for relief from stay. While the Bankruptcy Court may determine the dischargeability of these claims in the Creditors’ adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court does not have the authority to liquidate or estimate the Creditors’ civil rights claims, which comprise the gravamen of the Creditors’ complaints.

Section 362(d)(1) does not require relief from the automatic stay merely because the bankruptcy court may lack authority to decide the underlying claim.

In re Woods · filed 2014-08-15(d)(1)

In short, even though this court has the authority to hear the Claim, whether or not this court has such .authority, this court may in fact decline to grant relief from stay, and this argument fails to establish an independent factor for granting relief from the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtor filed its petition in bad faith.

In re Sterling Bluff Investors, LLC · filed 2014-08-22(d)(1)

Because the Court finds that the Debtor filed its petition in bad faith sufficient to warrant dismissal, the Court also necessarily finds that the Debtor filed its petition in bad faith sufficient to warrant stay relief.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause based on factors beyond a decline in collateral value.

In re Shivshankar Partnership LLC · filed 2014-09-19(d)(1)

Based upon the record, although the court finds that the value of the Comfort Inn may not be decreasing in value based upon the most recent appraisals, the declining value of collateral is only one of the factors to be examined in making the determination whether to grant relief from the automatic stay for cause under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, determined from the totality of the circumstances in the particular case.

King Oil Field Services, LLP v. PricewaterhouseCoopers (In re Poseidon Concepts Corp.) · filed 2014-09-25(d)(1)

Where a party in interest seeks relief from stay for cause, under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), courts determine whether cause exists “based on the totality of the circumstances in each particular case.”

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay when a debtor fails to make postpetition mortgage payments to a creditor entitled to enforce the debt.

In re Blanco · filed 2014-10-29(d)(1)

In light of the Debtor’s failure to make postpetition monthly installment payments on the debt, I also determined that it was entitled to relief from the automatic stay, in See, e.g., In re Rambo, 2004 WL 281011, at *3 (Bankr.E.D.Pa. Jan. 29, 2004).

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the stay to execute on exempt property protected from a prepetition debt, but cause exists to pursue nonexempt assets while the stay remains in effect.

Bricker v. Scalera (In re Scalera) · filed 2014-11-19(d)(1)

As the nondischargeable debts Movants seek to recover by executing against Debt- or’s Inherited IRA do not fall within the four exceptions enumerated under § 522(c) and Movants can no longer challenge the exemptability of the Inherited IRA, the Court finds that no “cause” exists to grant relief from stay under § 362(d)(1) for the purpose of pursuing action(s) against the Inherited IRA. However, the Court does find that “cause” exists to grant relief from stay to Movants to the extent that the stay is still in effect for the purpose of pursuing actions against the Debtor’s non-exempt assets.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to allow a pending state court lawsuit to resolve facts and liability relevant to the bankruptcy cases.

In re Dampier · filed 2015-01-12(d)(1)

For the reasons discussed above, the Court finds that the Creditors have shown “cause” for granting relief from stay in order to allow the State Court Lawsuit to proceed.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to deny relief from the automatic stay for lack of cause when the proposed claims against the debtor lack legal merit.

8 E. Frederick Place, LLC v. Flintkote Co. (In re Flintkote Co.) · filed 2015-01-16(d)(1)

If a § 362(d)(1) movant predicates “cause” upon an intention to file certain state law causes of action against a debtor, and a bankruptcy court concludes upon its review that those causes of action lack legal merit, then it logically follows that the asserted “cause” does not exist.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtors no longer have a legal or equitable interest in the property.

Soon Wha Chey v. Cohen (In Re Soon Wha Chey) · filed 2015-02-03(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by granting relief from the automatic bankruptcy stay to Wells Fargo because the Cheys no longer had a legal or equitable interest in the subject property.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to lift or annul the automatic stay for cause, which the court determines in its discretion from the circumstances.

In re BG Petroleum, LLC · filed 2015-02-13(d)(1)

Moreover, from a relief from stay perspective, 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to lift or annul the stay for “cause” shown. The use of the word “cause” in this statute is undefined, thereby leaving it up to the Court’s discretion as to whether the circumstances warrant the vacatur of the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits termination of the automatic stay for cause when a debtor files bankruptcy in bad faith as a tactic to gain an advantage in pending litigation.

In re Trust · filed 2015-03-04(d)(1)

The record from the Hearing clearly shows, and this Court finds, that the Debtor had no good faith reason to file its bankruptcy petition. Rather, the bankruptcy petition was filed as a litigation tactic to gain advantage in the Mississippi Action. The Court concludes that each of these findings is independent cause to terminate the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) so that the Mississippi Action may proceed in the Mississippi State Court.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, but a seller that retained only a security interest in estate property and gave no other reason to repossess it did not establish cause.

AutoCenters St. Charles, LLC v. Heien (In re Heien) · filed 2015-03-16(d)(1)

In this situation, AutoCenters’ ownership of the car would serve as the “cause” necessary for lift of the automatic stay. ... Heien therefore owned the Santa Fe at the time she filed bankruptcy, the Santa Fe was property of the estate, and AutoCenters has given no reason why it should be allowed to recover possession of the vehicle.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the estate holds legal title of no value because it cannot acquire the property’s equitable interest.

In re Zubenko · filed 2015-03-23(d)(1)

And without the ability to avoid that interest, the estate’s legal title to the Sacramento Property that became property of the estate under § 541(d) when the debtor filed his petition is of no value to the estate because the estate lacks the ability to acquire the equitable interest from Herbert. Therefore, based on the foregoing, the court concludes that cause exists under § 362(d)(1) to grant Herbert’s motion and to terminate the automatic stay of § 362(a) so that Herbert may record its prepetition trustee’s deed and proceed with an action for recovery of the property.

Section 362 permits stay relief for cause when the debtor cannot assume a franchise agreement and the franchisor needs to exercise its rights under nonbankruptcy law.

Moe's Franchisor, LLC v. Taylor Investment Partners II, LLC (In re Taylor Investment Partners II, LLC) · filed 2015-06-30(d)(1)

In light of this eventuality, cause exists to modify the stay to allow Movant to exercise its state-law rights with respect ...to the agreements.

Section 362(c)(3)(C) limits its bad-faith presumption to motions to extend the stay under (c)(3)(B); the presumption does not establish cause for relief from stay under (d)(1).

Alta Vista, LLC v. Juarez (In re Juarez) · filed 2015-07-02(c)(3)(C)

But wholesale importation of § 362(c)(3)(C) into a cause analysis under § 362(d)(1) is impossible given the specific limitation on the application of § 362(c)(3)(C) to motions for extension under § 362(c)(3)(B).

In deciding whether cause exists to lift the automatic stay, courts consider harm to the debtor’s equity holder as part of the prejudice to the estate.

Delaware Trust Co. v. Energy Future Intermediate Holding Co. (In re Energy Future Holdings Corp.) · filed 2015-07-08(d)(1)

Accordingly, harm to EFIH’s equity holder, EFH, is just as relevant as harm to other stakeholders (including EFIH’s creditors) and should be considered as part of the Court’s lift-stay analysis.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause when the estate suffers a substantial or continuing loss and rehabilitation is not reasonably likely.

White v. McDermott (In re White) · filed 2015-07-31(d)(1)

Relief from a stay under the cause standard in 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) is governed by the same standard for- conversion under 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4)(A) where there is a “substantial or continuing loss to or diminution of the estate and the absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation.”

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to lift the automatic stay for cause so a secured creditor can continue foreclosure.

In re Zair · filed 2015-08-13(d)(1)

No party-in-interest opposed HSBC obtaining relief from the automatic stay. The automatic stay should be lifted for cause under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause to continue prepetition litigation after weighing prejudice to the estate or debtor, the parties’ comparative hardship, and the creditor’s probability of success.

In re Scarborough-St. James Corp. · filed 2015-08-18(d)(1)

When a party seeks relief from stay to continue with prepetition litigation, this Court generally applies the following three prong balancing test: ... (i) Whether any great prejudice to either the bankruptcy estate or the debtor will result from continuation of the civil suit;' ... (ii) Whether the hardship to the non-bankruptcy party by maintenance of the stay considerably outweighs the hardship to the debtor; and ... (iii) Whether the creditor has a probability of prevailing on the merits.

Section 362(d)(1) does not permit relief from the automatic stay merely to let a general unsecured creditor collect its claim outside bankruptcy ahead of other unsecured creditors.

In re Ideal Mortgage Bankers, Ltd. · filed 2015-10-14(d)(1)

Notwithstanding such a broad and flexible standard for “cause” under section 362(d)(1), Global has not satisfied its burden of proof to show that “cause” exists for Global to proceed outside of the bankruptcy court to enforce, collect or recover on the Default Judgment. As set forth herein, as a holder of a general unsecured claim against the estate, Global is not entitled to the immediate payment of its claim from estate assets ahead of other general unsecured creditors nor can it proceed outside of bankruptcy with respect to third parties who may be recipients of estate assets.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when debtors are behind on mortgage payments, lack income to cure the arrearage, and have no feasible plan to retain the property.

In re Bycura · filed 2015-11-02(d)(1)

It is undisputed that Founders has a valid mortgage lien on the 13 acres and the Bycuras are in arrears on their pre- and post-petition mortgage payments. Additionally, the Bycuras have insufficient income to make the regularly scheduled payments and cure the arrearage, even after deducting the claimed attorneys’ fees and costs. At the hearing, no feasible plan to retain this property was evident, and the Bycuras’ counsel advised that, out of necessity, they likely will amend their plan to surrender the 13 acres. On these facts, sufficient cause exists to lift the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) and (2) to allow Founders to proceed with its state law collection rights regarding this property.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to continue state court litigation when the litigation is further along, involves additional parties and a jury demand, and does not unfairly burden the estate or other creditors.

In re: Daniel Martin, Sr. v. · filed 2015-12-16(d)(1)

The underlying cause of action involves state law fraud issues, additional parties not involved in the bankruptcy court proceeding, and a jury demand. The state court litigation is further along than the bankruptcy court. Additionally, a determination regarding dischargeability requires factual findings regarding the same elements as the state law fraud issues. Further, Martin has not demonstrated that the state court litigation will unfairly burden the bankruptcy estate or other creditors. Neither the bankruptcy court nor this Panel need to reach any determination regarding the Pecks’ likelihood of success on the merits of the underlying cause of action. The remaining factors are sufficient to support relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a party seeking relief from the automatic stay to show cause; ordinary inconvenience does not warrant relief unless its impact is severe enough.

In re Nierzwicki Holdings, LLC · filed 2015-12-30(d)(1)

The result is that the Council must show that “cause” exists to justify relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). ... The bankruptcy court should only step in when the impact is so severe that it rises to the level of cause for action. Ultimately, the evidence is insufficient to conclude that the Debtors’ current use of the premises is such that cause exists sufficient for relief from the stay to pursue the Litigation.

Section 362(d)(1) permits denial of relief from the automatic stay to pursue litigation when the movant fails to show cause, including a viable prospect of recovery from the third-party fund offered as the reason to continue the suit.

In re Mitchell · filed 2016-02-26(d)(1)

Weighing the evidence available to the Court to determine whether cause exists to allow proceedings in Virginia to continue, Movants have failed to show how they could be considered proper claimants under the Recovery Act. Accordingly, lifting the stay to allow Movants to take the first step to proceed with the Virginia action is futile.

Section 362(d)(1) permits lifting the automatic stay for cause to allow advanced state court litigation to proceed when the circumstances favor relief.

In re Beaumont · filed 2016-03-28(d)(1)

Here, the Court finds that cause exists to grant South State Bank’s Motions and lift the stay so that the pending state court litigation can proceed.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to allow litigation in another forum when that litigation aids administration of the bankruptcy estate.

In re Danzik · filed 2016-04-07(d)(1)

The overriding theme in determining whether to grant relief from the stay to permit litigation against Debtor in another forum is the effect of such litigation on the administration of the estate. As previously explained, allowing the Court to enter a final judgment will actually assist this Court and the estate as it allows for more expeditious resolution and plan confirmation.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor defaults on payments required by a confirmed plan.

In re Aguirre · filed 2016-04-18(d)(1)

The Debtors’ postconfirmation default for failing to pay Wheeler by the Deadline therefore is cause to lift the automatic stay, and neither JPMorgan nor the Debtors dispute that, nor could they.

Section 362(d)(1) gives bankruptcy courts discretion to find cause for lifting the automatic stay on grounds beyond lack of adequate protection.

In re Ferrouillat · filed 2016-04-21(d)(1)

Although the Court has found that Angel Homes is adequately protected under § 362(d)(1), because § 362(d)(1) uses the word “including,” the statute appears to contemplate other types of cause which are not specifically set out therein. The lack of enumerated types of cause leaves a bankruptcy court broad discretion in determining what constitutes cause for the stay to lift.

When a creditor seeks relief from the automatic stay for cause to foreclose, § 362(d)(1) requires the court to consider whether the creditor has a right to foreclose under the mortgage.

Liberty Bank & Trust Co. v. Danley (In re Danley) · filed 2016-07-11(d)(1)

That inquiry necessarily required the Court to consider whether Liberty Bank had the right to foreclose on the Residence under the terms of the mortgage.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause, assessed case by case; cause may exist when continuing litigation will not prejudice the estate and the creditor faces substantial harm with a probability of success.

In re Hurvitz · filed 2016-07-20(d)(1)

Under Bankruptcy Code § 362(d)(1), on request from a party in interest, a court shall grant relief from the automatic stay “for cause.” ... Blue-Grace has satisfied the Haines test. No prejudice will result to the bankruptcy estate if Blue-Grace is permitted to proceed to litigate the state court action against Mr. Hurvitz. By virtue of obtaining its temporary restraining order Blue-Grace has already established a probability of success in that case as well as the existence of substantial harm to itself.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause when allowing pending state court litigation to proceed serves judicial economy and avoids inconsistent rulings.

In re Personal Communications Devices, LLC · filed 2016-08-05(d)(1)

After analyzing these factors here, this Court has determined that cause exists to allow the parties to litigate the Claim Objection before the State Court. The interests of judicial economy and the avoidance of inconsistent rulings favor allowing the State Court to determine the contract and other state law issues underlying the Goldie Claim which have already been pending in the State Court Action for several years; the State Court is the forum originally selected by PCD and the one in which PCD, Goldie, and Quality One have all appeared and joined issue.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for missed post-petition mortgage payments without a separate finding that the creditor lacks adequate protection.

Marable v. Bank of New York Mellon (In re Marable) · filed 2016-09-07(d)(1)

The bankruptcy court was not required to also consider whether BONY was adequately protected in the Property. The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Marable’s failure to make post-petition mortgage payments constituted cause to lift the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor occupies property under an invalid lease to the exclusion of its rightful owner.

In re Murphey · filed 2016-11-30(d)(1)

These facts establish sufficient cause to grant the stay relief BOKF requests under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). It appears Debtor is continuing to occupy the Property to the exclusion of BOKF, the rightful owner of the Property, under an invalid lease granted by a lessor that had no interest in or right to lease the Property. ... Under these circumstances, cause exists to grant stay relief to permit BOKF to obtain possession of the Property.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to let a pending state court eviction action proceed when that forum can resolve lease issues without harming the bankruptcy estate.

In re Shaffer · filed 2016-12-07(d)(1)

Procaccianti has established cause under § 362(d)(1) for relief from the stay to permit completion of the eviction action pending in state court. Whether the lease was properly terminated as well as Debtor’s other defenses to eviction can be litigated in that pending state court proceeding.

Postconfirmation default alone does not establish cause to lift the automatic stay; the court must consider prejudice to the estate or debtor, hardship to the creditor, and the creditor’s likelihood of prevailing.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Wheeler Financial, Inc. (In re Aguirre) · filed 2017-01-23(d)(1)

As discussed above, Fernstrom is the controlling case law in this circuit for determining whether to lift an automatic stay for cause, and Fernstrom requires the Court to consider three factors before granting relief from the stay. It was an erroneous conclusion of law for the bankruptcy court to conclude that the Debtors’ default alone was justification to lift the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtor filed the bankruptcy petition in bad faith.

Froman v. Fein (In re Froman) · filed 2017-03-20(d)(1)

Therefore, for the reasons discussed above with respect to the decision to convert the case, it was not an abuse of discretion for the Bankruptcy Court to find cause to lift the stay based on bad faith.

Section 362(d)(1) permits limited stay relief to litigate royalty entitlement in state court without authorizing recovery of property or payment.

In re Breitburn Energy Partners LP · filed 2017-04-14(d)(1)

On balance, however, the Court concludes that Count One should be litigated along with QRE’s unstayed declaratory judgment claim in Texas. ... Nothing in this decision authorizes relief from the stay to recover any property or receive payment.

Section 362(d)(1) calls for a case-specific determination of cause to lift the automatic stay; early Chapter 11 arbitration may be denied when it would divert resources from reorganization.

In re Patriot Solar Group, LLC · filed 2017-06-26(d)(1)

Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that relief from the automatic stay should be granted for “cause.” 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). Because “cause” is not defined in the Bankruptcy Code, courts should determine on a case by case basis whether relief from the automatic stay is appropriate. ... Because this case is less than four months old, the court agrees that the Debtor should be given a reasonable period of time to propose a plan or market its assets for sale without simultaneously having to devote significant time and resources towards arbitration with Vanguard.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a former spouse needs a state court QDRO to obtain retirement assets in which she holds an equitable property interest.

In re Jeffers · filed 2017-06-30(d)(1)

The Movant’s property rights in the Debtor’s retirement funds are being held hostage by the automatic stay. The Debtor has no legal rights to them, nor does the estate. Therefore, cause exists pursuant to 11 U.SiC. § 362(d)(1) to grant relief from the automatic stay to allow the Movant to proceed in state court to obtain the QDRO necessary to obtain the distribution of her assets from their current custodian.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the property at issue never became part of the bankruptcy estate.

Hernandez v. Federal National Mortgage Association · filed 2017-07-12(d)(1)

Thus, the bankruptcy court properly granted Fannie Mae relief from the automatic stay as the property never became part of the bankruptcy estate.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a movant to establish an interest in property to show cause for relief from the automatic stay.

Peaje Invs. LLC v. Puerto Rico Highways (In re Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for Puerto Rico) · filed 2017-09-08(d)(1)

As an initial matter, Peaje's failure to establish, on this record, that it has a statutory lien means that it has similarly failed to establish an "interest in property" required to demonstrate cause to lift the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the stay so creditors can seek a receiver to control a PROMESA Title III debtor’s management and property when that relief would harm the debtor’s debt adjustment process.

In re Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for Puerto Rico · filed 2017-09-14(d)(1)

Therefore, even if and to the extent the Court has power to grant Movants' request, stay relief to apply for the appointment of a receiver is denied for lack of cause.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause based on bad faith or unfair dealing with creditors, even when bad faith is not found.

In re Ciarcia · filed 2017-11-01(d)(1)

Cause, for either dismissal or relief from the stay, may be found based on unenumerat-ed factors, including bad faith, or failure to deal with creditors fairly even where bad faith is not found.

A secured creditor’s failure to receive payments on its lien can be cause under § 362(d)(1) to lift the automatic stay as to property the debtor keeps in possession, even when a confirmed plan omits that creditor.

In re: Mark Raimundo Watson · filed 2017-11-09(d)(1)

Ditech was not receiving those payments; this was cause to grant stay relief as to Debtor’s possessory interest in the Property.

Section 362(d)(1) does not permit relief from the automatic stay for cause based solely on the cost of administering a legitimate bankruptcy case.

In re Omni Lion's Run, L.P. · filed 2017-11-13(d)(1)

In any event, the cost of administering legitimate bankruptcy cases, which the Court finds the present matters to be, does not itself constitute cause to lift the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) calls for a case-specific assessment of cause to lift the stay; factors designed for allowing a civil suit to proceed may not fit a tax purchaser’s request to obtain a tax deed.

In re Robinson · filed 2017-12-04(d)(1)

As is the case here, a motion for relief from stay does not always seek relief to allow a party in interest to continue a civil suit, and the three-factor test is inartful outside of the circumstances for which it is intended.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, which can include judicial efficiency when a parallel proceeding has substantially advanced.

Heotis v. City of Aurora · filed 2018-03-29(d)(1)

Last, the Bankruptcy Court again correctly emphasized that judicial efficiency can constitute cause to lift the Automatic Stay, and that the lengthy parallel foreclosure proceeding and the efforts already expended in that case again supported lifting the stay.

Section 362(d)(1) does not require relief from the automatic stay merely because the bankruptcy court cannot try the underlying personal injury action when dischargeability remains undecided.

In re Minick · filed 2018-05-31(d)(1)

Mr. Roberts seeks as an alternative to dismissal that the Court grant relief from stay for cause. The cause cited is simply that the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and decide a personal injury case. ... If the purpose of the state court civil action is to determine liability, relief from stay may not be necessary. Any liability will be discharged, even if the trial court has not rendered judgment, if the debtor receives a discharge and this debt has not been excepted from discharge. ... For these reasons, cause has not been shown to grant relief from stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to assert a counterclaim in an existing action, but the cause factors may weigh against starting a separate civil action.

In re EB Holdings II, Inc. · filed 2018-07-06(d)(1)

Based on the foregoing, application of the Sonnax/Curtis Factors to the record before this court does not support a finding of sufficient cause under Section 362(d)(1) to permit GLAS to commence another civil action. The court also concludes, however, that sufficient cause exists to permit GLAS to respond to the complaint filed by EBH in the EBH-GLAS Action.

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to deny relief from the automatic stay when judicial economy and protection of the estate favor resolving a proposed property sale in bankruptcy court.

In re Guy · filed 2018-07-10(d)(1)

Although the Property can be partitioned in state court without the necessity of expertise from this court, judicial economy and protection of the estate favor a comparable partition occurring under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to let a state court decide divorce issues through final judgment while monetary claims remain stayed from enforcement.

Topfer v. Topfer (In re Topfer) · filed 2018-07-25(d)(1)

It is clear that cause exists to grant relief from the automatic stay. I will enter an order granting Evelyne relief from the automatic stay to proceed with the Divorce Action to a final, unappealable judgment. The relief will include the ability of the State Court to determine issues of equitable distribution, alimony, attorney's fees, costs, and sanctions. However, my order will provide that no monetary claim against Kurt or property of the estate can be made, other than through the claims allowance process, provided in § 502 of the Bankruptcy Code, or by further order of this Court. The automatic stay remains in place against enforcement of monetary claims or judgments by Evelyne.

In a PROMESA Title III case, § 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay to protect a creditor’s property interest even without the Oversight Board’s consent.

Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for P.R. v. Ad Hoc Grp. of PREPA Bondholders (In Re Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for P.R.) · filed 2018-08-08(d)(1)

The Title III court also pointed out that Section 305 would not bar section 362(d) relief when the Oversight Board consents to the requested relief. But the principal aim of section 362(d)(1) is to protect the creditor when protection is needed, which is customarily when the debtor is not obliging. In short, saying that a creditor can get relief from the stay when the debtor's representative consents effectively wipes out section 362(d)(1) precisely when it is most likely needed.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, and failure to make mortgage payments can itself constitute cause.

Osuji v. Deutsche Bank, N.A. · filed 2018-09-28(d)(1)

The Court agrees that appellant's nonpayment could be grounds on its own for granting the motion for relief from the automatic stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a creditor lacks adequate protection because there is no equity in the property securing its claim.

In re Coffey · filed 2018-12-21(d)(1)

Gateway is not adequately protected and therefore cause exists for relief from stay under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to modify the automatic stay for cause while the parties attempt to negotiate a cure of arrears.

SunTrust Bank v. Hamlin · filed 2019-01-24(d)(1)

In crafting the aforementioned compromise, the Bankruptcy Court recognized the equities on both sides and “modified” the automatic stay accordingly.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the stay for judgment collection from community earnings when collection would compromise a Chapter 13 plan and favor one unsecured creditor over others.

Kevin Marion Hales and Cathy Lynn Hales · filed 2019-03-06(d)(1)

Creditor has not shown that cause exists to allow Creditor to enforce the Judgment outside of bankruptcy against community earnings and assets, which would compromise the feasibility of Debtor’s plan and likely result in a greater recovery for Creditor than for other unsecured creditors. Therefore, the Motion for relief from the automatic stay will be denied.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor fails to make post-petition payments and pursues meritless theories that delay and prejudice a secured creditor.

LEILANI HOPE RICKERT · filed 2019-04-29(d)(1)

This leaves remaining § 362(d)(1), which provides that “the Court shall grant relief rom the stay . . . for cause.” ... Rather than subject SLS to further delay that results from frivolous pleadings, delay that increases its attorney’s fees and costs and otherwise prejudices it, Debtor’s failure to make post-petition payments coupled with her pattern of presenting legal theories devoid of any merit to the Court, cause exists for granting SLS stay relief.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to continue foreclosure when the debtor’s pending RESPA claims do not support keeping the stay in place.

In re Kolnberger · filed 2019-05-10(d)(1)

The balance of harms in lifting the stay does not favor Debtor because, as discussed above, Debtor's RESPA claims do not provide Debtor with a right to injunctive relief against DBT to stay the foreclosure process, and it would be prejudicial to DBT to keep the stay in effect based on Debtor's RESPA violation claims when injunctive relief would not otherwise be available.

Section 362(d)(1) permits lifting the automatic stay to start the Tax Court petition period when continued tolling would serve no purpose and invite abuse.

Joseph Yerushalmi · filed 2019-06-05(d)(1)

Accordingly, based on the record placed before the Court, the automatic stay imposed under § 362(a)(8) is lifted to allow the running of the 150-day Period.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the automatic stay so a creditor can continue a damages suit against the debtor when that suit falls within the stay’s purpose of protecting the debtor from separate creditor litigation.

In re Frantz · filed 2019-07-01(d)(1)

More important, Raders's suit against the debtor is the very type of litigation that the § 362(a) stay is designed to stop. Raders has not shown that cause exists to modify that stay to allow him to continue his District Court litigation against Frantz.

Section 362(d)(1) requires a creditor seeking to resume state court litigation against a debtor to show cause for relief from the automatic stay; cause is assessed in light of the relevant circumstances, including whether the litigation would resolve the issues and serve judicial economy.

Julie Diana Lyon · filed 2019-07-02(d)(1)

The Court finds and concludes that JCH’s burden has not been met, and good and sufficient “cause” has not been shown to terminate the § 362(a) stay and allow the State Court Action to proceed insofar as the claims against Debtor.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, determined case by case; state court litigation that helps resolve claims without interfering with the bankruptcy case can supply cause.

PG&E Corporation · filed 2019-08-16(d)(1)

A bankruptcy court shall lift the automatic stay for cause, which is not defined in the Bankruptcy Code but is decided on a case-by-case basis. ... Here, cause exists to grant relief from stay, both including and independent of the Curtis factors.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a claimant seeks to recover funds that belong to the claimant rather than the bankruptcy estate.

John E. Barrett, Jr. and Sarah E. Ramirez · filed 2019-08-16(d)(1)

Based upon the foregoing discussion, the Court finds that sufficient cause exists under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) to grant Dona relief from the stay to pursue any remedies necessary to recover her interest in the Engler Funds.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the prejudice to the debtor is outweighed by the hardship to the movant and the estate can be protected by requiring enforcement through the bankruptcy court.

In re Rizzo · filed 2019-07-29(d)(1)

Moreover, Debtor's plan does not depend upon the use of the disputed funds for its feasibility, and the estate can be protected by a requirement that Movants seek enforcement of any judgment through the bankruptcy court. Under the facts of this case, any prejudice to Debtor of granting relief from stay to resume the proceedings in State Court does not appear to outweigh the prejudice to Movants of starting over in this Court to address the same core issue-the ownership of the funds.

When deciding whether to grant relief from the automatic stay for cause, a court must consider the parties’ legal and equitable interests in disputed property.

Gracia-Gracia v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico · filed 2019-09-25(d)(1)

We agree with the plaintiffs that, in order to properly weigh the In re Sonnax factors, the Title III court first needed to make at least a preliminary determination of the parties' respective property interests in the disputed funds.

Section 362(d)(1) does not treat an enforceable prepetition agreement merely waiving opposition to stay relief as cause for relief by itself.

Orchard Hills Baptist Church, Inc. · filed 2019-10-28(d)(1)

As such, the enforceability of the Waiver alone does not constitute cause pursuant to § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtor filed bankruptcy in bad faith.

Walter Posner · filed 2019-11-13(d)(1)

There is “cause” to grant stay relief under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) because Walter lacked good faith in filing bankruptcy.

A debtor’s bad-faith bankruptcy filing constitutes cause for relief from the automatic stay under § 362(d)(1).

Walter Posner · filed 2019-11-15(d)(1)

A lack of good faith in filing a petition constitutes cause for relief from the stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits a court to condition relief from the automatic stay for cause, including limiting the forum when judicial economy supports that restriction.

Steven L. Mainous and Raeanne E. Mainous · filed 2019-11-21(d)(1)

Accordingly, the principles of judicial economy support limiting relief to state and federal courts in the Southern District of Alabama to allow USL to defend the pending action and litigate the matters for which relief from the automatic stay has been requested.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor fails to make post-petition payments.

William A. King · filed 2019-11-25(d)(1)

Notwithstanding the failure to meet its burden for retroactive relief, the City has shown cause to grant relief from stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) due to the debtor’s lack of post-petition payments, and the debtor has not opposed the relief sought.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause based on a debtor’s failure to make post-petition payments.

Virginia Y. Robinson · filed 2019-11-25(d)(1)

Notwithstanding the failure to meet its burden for retroactive relief, the City has shown cause to grant relief from stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1) due to the debtor’s lack of post-petition payments, and the debtor has not opposed the relief sought.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtor has no equity in the property and the proposed plan does not address the lien claim.

Jeannie Quinteros · filed 2019-11-25(d)(1)

The debtor has not articulated any reason under the Bankruptcy Code to keep the automatic stay in place. In these circumstances, relief from the automatic stay is appropriate without addressing Capital Ventures’ right to enforce the Note.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, including a debtor’s lack of good faith.

Leo Blas · filed 2019-12-17(d)(1)

“Cause” under section 362(d)(1) includes a lack of good faith on the part of the debtor.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when, considering the totality of the circumstances, the hardship of maintaining the stay outweighs the harm that relief would cause the debtor and the bankruptcy process.

James E. Mager · filed 2020-02-12(d)(1)

As stated in Part III, supra, the essence of the determination whether to grant relief from the automatic stay to an unsecured creditor involves balancing the impact of permitting the creditor to pursue its claim in another forum against the impact that such relief is likely to have on the bankruptcy process. Here, after considering the competing concerns, I conclude that the balance tips in favor of Fresh Look for several reasons.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor files a Chapter 13 case in bad faith.

Louis Thomas Bauer, Jr. · filed 2020-02-19(d)(1)

Accordingly, the court finds that the Creditor has made a prima facie showing that Debtor’s Chapter 13 Plan was filed in bad faith, and that there are additional reasons why the Motion for Relief from Stay should be granted.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause so a former spouse may seek a QDRO in state court concerning retirement funds outside the bankruptcy estate.

Shelly Nichole Pittman · filed 2020-02-20(d)(1)

The Court finds cause to grant relief from stay for the limited purpose for approving a QDRO, if the district court determines that Dennis is entitled to such an order.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause based on the circumstances, including whether separate state law claims can be resolved in state court.

PG&E Corporation · filed 2020-02-25(d)(1)

A bankruptcy court shall lift the automatic stay for cause, which is not defined in the Bankruptcy Code but is decided on a case-by-case basis. ... Applying the relevant Curtis factors, cause exists to grant relief from stay.

Section 362(d)(1) permits limited relief from the automatic stay for a divorce court to determine marital property interests while the bankruptcy court retains control over distribution of estate property.

Kanwaldeep Singh Kalsi · filed 2020-03-31(d)(1)

An analysis of the applicable Sonnax factors demonstrates that cause exists to partially lift the automatic stay as to the Divorce Action for the state court to determine the parties’ property interests but not to distribute the property.

Section 362(d)(1) allows relief from the automatic stay for cause, which may be established by a prolonged failure to make mortgage payments.

Richard Eichert Hardison and Mary Ann Hardison · filed 2020-03-31(d)(1)

Moreover, given the shocking lack of payment history, the Court would nevertheless find “cause” under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits a bankruptcy court to lift the automatic stay for cause when the equities favor allowing state-court contempt proceedings to continue.

In Re. Kupperstein · filed 2020-04-22(d)(1)

No abuse of discretion could arise from concluding that a balancing of the equities here strongly disfavors Kupperstein, or that consideration of any set of helpful factors yields a finding of cause sufficient to warrant lifting the automatic stay. ... Accordingly, the Bankruptcy Court’s order granting stay relief for cause pursuant to § 362(d)(1) is AFFIRMED.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when the debtor cannot retain the property through a defaulted land contract.

Marvin Okeefe Chapman · filed 2020-04-29(d)(1)

Thus, the Court finds cause under 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(1) to lift the automatic stay to permit Rose to terminate Debtor’s interest in connection with any forfeiture or other proceedings brought against Ware.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to continue pending litigation, while collection of any judgment against the debtor remains in bankruptcy.

950 Meat & Grocery Inc. · filed 2020-05-20(d)(1)

The Court may grant relief from the automatic stay “for cause, including a lack of adequate protection of an interest in property,” 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), but does not otherwise define or provide an example of “cause.” ... Accordingly, I conclude that the Motion is granted with one caveat. If General recovers a money judgment against the Debtor, it cannot collect the judgment except through this bankruptcy proceeding.

Section 362(d)(1) does not provide cause to lift the stay for state court litigation when a creditor missed the deadline to seek a dischargeability determination and that litigation has no reason to proceed.

Mardi Lynn Topcik · filed 2020-05-22(d)(1)

Further, cause does not exist for relief from stay because an adversary proceeding was not timely filed to determine the dischargeability of any debt owed by Mrs. Topcik to Mr. Hornback; accordingly, there is no reason for the state court litigation to move forward.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor fails to make post-petition mortgage payments.

ROTHMAN v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. · filed 2020-05-26(d)(1)

As such, there is “cause” for relief under § 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause, including when a secured creditor is not receiving required adequate protection payments.

Reza Farzan · filed 2020-05-27(d)(1)

Cause exists for relief from stay. ... Adequate protection is required but is not being paid.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause when a debtor files a bankruptcy petition in bad faith.

Thomas Errico · filed 2020-06-22(d)(1)

For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Debtor’s petition and the Plans he has filed were not filed in good faith. The Court also finds, first, that cause exists to grant relief from the automatic stay to Creditors under § 362(d)(1), which stay relief is binding upon Debtor and all successors-in-interest; second, that Debtor is unable to propose a plan that satisfies the good faith requirements of § 1325; and third, that the case should be dismissed with a one-year prohibition against refiling.

Section 362(d)(1) permits relief from the automatic stay for cause to allow creditors to pursue confirmation of an arbitration award in state court.

David W. Fleming, II · filed 2020-07-02(d)(1)

The Court finds that the Movants have established “cause” to grant relief from the stay under section 362(d)(1).

Section 362(d)(1) does not warrant relief from the stay for cause based on a speculative future inventory default when the debtor currently complies with its dealership agreement.

Jonesboro Tractor Sales, Inc. · filed 2020-07-22(d)(1)

The Court does not find at this time that the stay should be lifted for “cause” under Section 362(d)(1).