In re Cunningham, Bankruptcy No. 80-01173J
Decision Date | 29 January 1981 |
Docket Number | Adv. Proceeding No. 80-0543.,Bankruptcy No. 80-01173J |
Citation | 9 BR 70 |
Parties | In re Charles Allen CUNNINGHAM and Shirley Ruth Cunningham, Debtors. Charles A. CUNNINGHAM, Petitioner, v. Shirley R. CUNNINGHAM, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of New Mexico |
Ruth J. Thomas, Dutton, Winchester & Thomas, Ltd., Las Cruces, N.M., for petitioner.
Shirley Ruth Cunningham, pro se.
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR DIVORCE
Debtors petition this Court to grant a divorce in the above-captioned case and alleges that this Court has jurisdiction of this subject matter pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1). That section provides, in pertinent part:
The debtor reasons that a divorce petition against a debtor, filed in state court after the filing of the bankruptcy petition, would be a violation of the automatic stay against "judicial proceedings". The provisions of § 362(a)(1) are limited, though, to actions that could have been commenced before the bankruptcy case was filed or to claims that arose before the case. A "claim", as defined by the Code at § 101(4), means:
The divorce petition is clearly not within the meaning of §§ 362(a)(1) and 101(4). Such jurisdictional reliance by the debtor, therefore, is unfounded.
The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 (the Code) expanded somewhat the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court to "original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases" under the Code, 28 U.S.C. § 1471(a) (1979), and original but not exclusive jurisdiction of all civil proceedings relating to cases under the Code, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial