-
884 F.2d 478·
9th Cir.·
1989-09-05
·cited 24×
The court held that a bankruptcy court order lifting the automatic stay is invalid if entered after the underlying bankruptcy case has been dismissed, and that creditors who violate the automatic stay with knowledge of the bankruptcy filing are liable for damages, even if they re
-
875 F.2d 224·
9th Cir.·
1989-05-15
·cited 22×
The court held that filing motions to collect on a pre-bankruptcy judgment and to withdraw the reference after notice of bankruptcy constitutes a willful violation of the automatic stay, but remanded for recalculation of interest.
-
850 F.2d 165·
3d Cir.·
1988-06-24
·cited 15×
Conducting a sales tax audit and issuing a notice of audit assessment does not violate the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362, as it is the functional equivalent of a notice of tax deficiency permitted by § 362(b)(9).
-
830 F.2d 1033·
9th Cir.·
1987-10-20
·cited 14×
The court held that state courts lack jurisdiction to entertain claims that a bankruptcy filing constitutes an abuse of process, as bankruptcy matters fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction. It reversed the award of attorney's fees and sanctions.
-
853 F.2d 497·
6th Cir.·
1988-08-11
·cited 12×
The court held that while the bank willfully violated the automatic stay, the damages awarded were based on insufficient and speculative evidence, requiring a remand for a new damages hearing.
-
132 B.R. 775·
M.D. Fla.·
1991-10-01
·cited 11×
The court held that while the IRS willfully violated the automatic stay and sovereign immunity was waived for attorney fees, the award was improper without proof of actual fees incurred.
-
918 F.2d 1170·
5th Cir.·
1990-12-11
·cited 10×
The court held that a claim for fraudulent transfer of a homestead property belongs to the bankruptcy trustee and is property of the estate, thus a state court suit alleging such a transfer violates the automatic stay. However, the court reversed the imposition of sanctions, find
-
920 F.2d 183·
2d Cir.·
1990-12-10
·cited 6×
The court held that the plain language of Bankruptcy Code § 362(h) limits its application to natural persons ('individuals') and does not permit recovery of damages by corporate debtors.
-
910 F.2d 509·
8th Cir.·
1990-08-06
·cited 6×
The court held that while the IRS is bound by the automatic stay, sovereign immunity requires monetary awards for willful violations to be offset against the IRS's claims under 11 U.S.C. § 106(b), rather than an affirmative judgment, unless attorneys' fees are awarded affirmative
-
889 F.2d 773·
8th Cir.·
1989-11-13
·cited 4×
The court held that a creditor's refusal to return property lawfully seized before a bankruptcy petition filing violates the automatic stay, and such willful violations can warrant attorney's fees and punitive damages.
-
876 F.2d 456·
5th Cir.·
1989-06-30
·cited 4×
The court held that 11 U.S.C. § 362(h) creates a private cause of action for individuals injured by a willful violation of an automatic stay.
-
257 B.R. 93·
M.D. Fla.·
2000-12-14
·cited 2×
The court held that under Florida law, upon repossession of a vehicle due to default, the debtor's interest in the vehicle ceases to be property of the bankruptcy estate, with only a right of redemption remaining.
-
254 B.R. 46·
M.D. Fla.·
2000-09-28
·cited 2×
The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's dismissal of Singer's Chapter 11 petition for bad faith filing and affirmed the denial of sanctions, finding the Virginia Order did not violate the automatic stay as it affected non-debtor assets.
-
991 F.2d 613·
9th Cir.·
1993-04-23
·cited 2×
The court held that a corporation cannot recover damages under 11 U.S.C. § 362(h) for willful violation of the automatic stay, but may pursue damages through civil contempt, and that the Knights willfully violated the automatic stay.
-
974 F.2d 113·
9th Cir.·
1992-09-01
·cited 2×
The court held that the IRS's filing of a tax lien after a bankruptcy petition was filed constituted a willful violation of the automatic stay, and that the doctrine of sovereign immunity did not shield the government from liability for damages under 11 U.S.C. § 106(a).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-23
Summary judgment is granted for the defendant because the plaintiff failed to show a willful violation of the automatic stay or resulting damages.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-04
The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's order and final judgment, finding no clear error in factual findings and no reversible error in legal conclusions regarding the automatic stay violation and claim timeliness.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-10-30
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the complaint lacked sufficient factual allegations to support a claim for violation of the automatic stay.
-
160 B.R. 391·
M.D. Fla.·
1993-11-09
The court held that O'Hara Moving & Storage, Inc. willfully violated the automatic stay by selling the debtor's household goods after receiving notice of her bankruptcy filing, and awarded actual damages and attorney fees.
-
994 F.2d 42·
1st Cir.·
1993-06-03
The court held that the ex-wife's actions to attach property were not a willful violation of the automatic stay because it was reasonable for her to believe the property was not part of the bankruptcy estate, given the ambiguous ownership records.