MELIKIAN ENTERPRISES, LLLP, Creditor, Appellant v. Steven D. MCCORMICK; Karen A. McCormick, Debtors, Appellees

MELIKIAN ENTERPRISES, LLLP, Creditor, Appellant v. Steven D. MCCORMICK; Karen A. McCormick, Debtors, Appellees

Section 502 does not preempt Arizona Rev. Stat. § 33-814; § 108(c) governs tolling and extended the 90-day period to 30 days after termination of the automatic stay, which occurred when the Chapter 11 case was closed on November 14, 2013, making December 16, 2013 the deadline; Melikian’s state suit was dismissed for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
863 F.3d 802; 77 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1898; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12351; 64 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 92; 2017 WL 2945422
Parties
Appellant / Creditor: Melikian Enterprises, LLLP; Appellee / Debtor: Steven D. McCormick; Appellee / Debtor: Karen A. McCormick
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction
United States
Judgment Date
11 July 2017
Case Number
15-3983
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal / Appellate Review
Outcome
Affirmed
Legal Topics
Automatic Stay, Proof of Claim, Deficiency Judgment, Statute of Repose, Bankruptcy Tolling (11 U.s.c. § 108(c)), Service of Process
Source Language
english
Bankruptcy Preemption Real Property Law Civil Procedure Automatic Stay Proof of Claim Deficiency Judgment Statute of Repose +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melikian Enterprises, LLLP

Appellant / Creditor

Steven D. McCormick

Appellee / Debtor

Karen A. McCormick

Appellee / Debtor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal / Appellate Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether federal Bankruptcy Code preempts Arizona Rev. Stat. § 33-814 such that a creditor need not comply with the 90-day deficiency-action rule
  2. 2 Whether Melikian’s pre-sale Arizona state-court suit satisfied the § 33-814 requirement to ‘maintain’ an action
  3. 3 Whether the bankruptcy court’s exclusive jurisdiction obviated the need for a separate state-court deficiency action

Ratio Decidendi

Section 502 does not preempt Arizona Rev. Stat. § 33-814; § 108(c) governs tolling and extended the 90-day period to 30 days after termination of the automatic stay, which occurred when the Chapter 11 case was closed on November 14, 2013, making December 16, 2013 the deadline; Melikian’s state suit was dismissed for failure of service and thus was not ‘maintained’ within the tolled period, so the bankruptcy court correctly disallowed Melikian’s proof of claim for a deficiency.

Court Disposition

Affirmed

Orders

  • District court decision affirming bankruptcy court affirmed
  • Proof of claim for deficiency disallowed under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-814