Kenoyer

Kenoyer v. Cardinale (In re Kenoyer)

Good Law
2013 Bankr. LEXIS 1091·489 B.R. 103
United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 20, 2013Bankruptcy No. 11-53472-ASW; Adversary No. 11-05130California10,549 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Weissbrodt, J.

DECISION GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendants Noreen Cardinale, Martha Caron, and Margaret Bush (collectively referred to as “Defendants”) have moved for summary judgment, or in the alternative summary adjudication, on Plaintiff Deraid Kenoyer’s claims against Defendants relating to Defendants’ alleged violation of the automatic stay. Attorney Stephen Finestone represents Defendants, and attorneys Kathryn Diemer and Judith Whitman 1 represent Mr. Kenoyer. Mr. *106 Kenoyer filed a late Opposition, which Mr. Kenoyer wrote himself. After a telephonic conference with Mr. Finestone and Ms. Diemer, the Court extended the briefing schedule, and Ms. Diemer filed an Opposition on behalf of Mr. Kenoyer. Defendants replied to the second Opposition. Having considered the parties’ written arguments, evidence, and statements made at the hearing on December 13, 2012, and for the reasons explained below, the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.

I. Standard of Review

A court shall grant summary judgment if the pleadings and any filed affidavits, discovery responses and deposition testimony show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that…

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.