In re Greenstein

Good Law
589 B.R. 854
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 14, 2018Lead Case No. 2:17-cv-08371-ODW; C/w : 2:17-cv-08373-ODW; 2:17-cv-08899-ODW; 2:17-cv-08919-ODW; 2:17-cv-08923-ODW; Bankruptcy Case Nos. 1:12-bk-15099-MB; Adversary Case Nos. 1:15-ap-01220-MBCalifornia5,901 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wright, J.

*857 I. INTRODUCTION

Appellant Laurel Greenstein appeals from several orders issued by the bankruptcy court, relating to her Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and related adversary proceedings. She contends that her home (the "Property") was wrongfully foreclosed on by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and several corporate representatives, 1 (collectively, "Wells Fargo") in violation of the automatic stay in her case.

In a 63-page Amended Consolidated Memorandum of Decision, the bankruptcy court denied Greenstein's Motion to Set Aside Foreclosure Sale in violation of Automatic Stay ("Set Aside Motion"), and granted Motions to Dismiss Adversary Proceedings with Prejudice as to All Defendants. (Appellant's Appendix of Evidence ("AA") vol. I, 135-99, ECF No. 27. 2 ) While Greenstein sets forth seven issues on appeal, the substance of her appeal focuses on the validity of an in rem order (the "In Rem Order") issued by another bankruptcy court in an action involving debtor Roger Lipkis (the "Lipkis Action"). Among other things, Greenstein claims the In Rem Order was invalid because a fraudulent deed was presented in the Lipkis Action, which purported to transfer ownership rights in the Property from…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.