This week, Representative John Conyers introduced the “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009” (H.R. 1106) (the “Act”), which has been circulated in advance of a vote by the House of Representatives anticipated as early as today. Additional amendments have been offered to the bill, but it is unclear which, if any, will be incorporated into the final text. It is not expected that the Senate will consider its version of the bill until mid-March.

In re Betchan, 524 B.R. 830 (Bankr. E.D. Wash. 2015) –

A mortgagee was the highest bidder at a foreclosure sale that took place shortly before the debtor filed bankruptcy.  The lender requested relief from the automatic stay in order to evict the debtor on the basis that transfer of the property was completed prepetition so that it was not part of the debtor’s bankruptcy estate.

Branch Bank & Trust Co. v. Michael’s Enterprises of Virginia, Inc. (In re Michael’s Enterprises of Virginia, Inc.), 519 B.R. 916 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2014)  –

A mortgage lender sought sanctions against the debtor, its sole shareholder and its attorney.  It alleged that the bankruptcy petition was filed for an improper purpose.

U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Brumfiel (In re Brumfiel), 514 B.R. 637 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2014) –

After a debtor reopened her chapter 7 bankruptcy case, a lender moved for relief from the automatic stay in order to continue with a foreclosure action. The debtor objected, arguing among other things that the lender did not have standing to request relief.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. 804 Congress, L.L.C. (In re 804 Congress, L.L.C.), 756 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 2014) –

After an oversecured creditor obtained relief from the automatic stay and foreclosed on some property, the bankruptcy court asserted jurisdiction over disposition of the sale proceeds and denied in part the creditor’s claim for fees. The district court reversed and the case was appealed to the 5thCircuit.

DeGiacomo v. Traverse (In re Traverse), 753 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2014) –

In re Demers, 511 B.R. 233 (Bankr. D. R.I. 2014) –

A chapter 13 debtor objected to the portion of a mortgagee’s claim consisting of expenses related to foreclosure of its mortgage. She argued that since the mortgagee failed to comply with notice requirements under the mortgage, the foreclosure expenses were not valid.

Clinton County Treasurer v. Wolinsky, 511 B.R. 34 (N.D.N.Y. 2014) 

A chapter 7 trustee sought to avoid a property tax foreclosure as a fraudulent transfer and then to recover damages from the foreclosing county. The bankruptcy court agreed that the transfer was a fraudulent conveyance, but awarded only about half of the damages requested by the trustee. Both the county treasurer and the trustee appealed.

In re Cook, 481 B.R. 265 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. 2012) –

Trauner v. State Bank & Trust Co. (In re Solid Rock Development Corp.), 481 B.R. 221 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2012) –