MARIE R. ALEXANDRE, APPELLANT,
v.
SCRIBNER VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., UNKNOWN SPOUSE OF MARIE R. ALEXANDRE, UNKNOWN TENANT IN POSSESSION #1 AND UNKNOWN TENANT IN POSSESSION # 2, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Marie Alexandre appealed the trial court's denial of her motion to stay a writ of possession and set aside a foreclosure sale by a homeowners association. The court reversed, holding that the trial court erred in proceeding with the foreclosure sale after Alexandre filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition that triggered an automatic stay under federal bankruptcy law.
The court held that it was error for the trial court to enforce the foreclosure judgment and proceed with the sale after the automatic stay was in place. The filing of a bankruptcy petition automatically stays the commencement or continuation of an action against the debtor's property, and the foreclosure sale should not have proceeded until the stay was lifted.
[1] The filing of a bankruptcy petition automatically stays the commencement or continuation of an action against the debtor's property.
[2] It is error for a court to enforce a judgment of foreclosure on property owned by the debtor when an automatic stay is in place.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The filing of a bankruptcy petition automatically stays the commencement or continuation of an action against the debtor's property.”
Establishes the automatic stay principle under 11 U.S.C. Section 362(a) that was violated by the foreclosure sale
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceScribner Village Homeowners Association obtained a final judgment of foreclosure against Alexandre on its lien for unpaid assessments. Before the fore…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Certificate Of Title cases and more on FLexlaw
Marie Alexandre appeals the order denying her motion to stay the-clerk’s issuance- of a writ of possession and/or to set aside a foreclosure sale following the entry of final judgment in a foreclosure action. We reverse.
Scribner Village Homeowners Association (the “HOA”) obtained a-final judgment of foreclosure against Appellant on its lien for unpaid assessments. The judgment set Appellant’s property for a public sale. Before the sale was set to occur, Appellant filed a suggestion of bankruptcy in the circuit court reflecting that Appellant filed a petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the federal bankruptcy court. The suggestion stated that by virtue of her petition, “this action has been stayed by the operation of 11 U.S.C. Section 362.” Despite Appellant’s filing, the sale' proceeded and the clerk of court issued a certificate of sale to HOA as the highest bidder as well as a certificate of title. Following the HOA’s request for a writ of possession, Appellant filed a motion asking the court to stay any , issuance of a writ of possession and set aside the final judgment of foreclosure and certificate of title. The trial court denied Appellant’s motion. This appeal follows.
“The filing of a -bankruptcy petition automatically stays the commencement or continuation of an action against the debt- or’s property.” In re Clarke, 373 B.R. 769, 771 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.2006) (citing 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)). Accordingly, it is error for a court to enforce a judgment of foreclosure on property owned by the debtor when an automatic stay is in place. Heritage Family Pub, Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n of Clearwater, 316 So.2d 558, 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) (holding that trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to vacate foreclosure sale and cancel certificate of sale when sale was conducted after the defendant filed a petition for bankruptcy thus creating an automatic stay prior to the sale). As Appellant filed a petition for bankruptcy before the foreclosure sale, the sale- should not have proceeded until the stay was lifted. Id.; 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying Appellant’s motion to set aside the sale and everything that flowed from it.
Reversed and remanded.'
MAY and GERBER, JJ., concur.