Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Carl B. Davis, Chapter 13 Trustee v. Tyson Prepared Foods, Inc.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 17-3247 · judgment October 17, 2018
Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a circuit split argued in the petition, a petition filed soon after the judgment below, and a Tenth Circuit decision below, and down for a business respondent.
Question presented
By operation of law, when a debtor files a bankruptcy petition, a bankruptcy “estate” is created consisting of all of the debtor’s property “wherever located and by whomever held.” 11 U.S.C. §541. In addition, the Bankruptcy Code provides that the filing of a petition “operates as a stay, applicable to all entities, of . . . (3) any act to obtain possession of property of the estate . . . or to exercise control over property of the estate; (4) any act to create, perfect, or enforce any lien against property of the estate; (5) any act to create, perfect, or enforce against property of the debtor any lien . . .; [and] (6) any act to collect, assess, or recover a claim against the debtor that arose before the commencement of the case . . . .” 11 U.S.C. §362(a). Five Courts of Appeals have held that these prohibitions include passively holding or obtaining an interest in property of the debtor or the estate. Thus, a creditor’s passive retention of seized property or the creditor’s passive acquisition of a lien violates the automatic stay. Two Courts of Appeals, including the court below, have held that these prohibitions do not encompass passively holding or obtaining an interest in property, but apply only to affirmative conduct. Thus the passive retention of seized property or the passive acquisition of a lien do not violate the stay. The question presented is: Should the Court grant certiorari to resolve an entrenched and acknowledged conflict among the courts of appeals over whether section 362(a) applies to a creditor’s passively holding or obtaining an interest in property of the debtor or the estate?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
George Eric Brunstad Jr.
Dechert LLP
For respondent
Sarah Elaine Harrington
Covington & Burling LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Proceedings
- May 20 2019Petition DENIED.
- May 13 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.
- May 08 2019Rescheduled.
- Apr 23 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
- Apr 19 2019Reply of petitioner Carl B. Davis, Chapter 13 Trustee filed.
- Apr 09 2019Brief of respondent Tyson Prepared Foods, Inc. in opposition filed.
- Feb 20 2019Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 9, 2019.
- Feb 15 2019Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 8, 2019 to April 9, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 06 2019Response Requested. (Due March 8, 2019)
- Jan 30 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
- Jan 24 2019Waiver of right of respondent Tyson Prepared Foods, Inc. to respond filed.
- Jan 14 2019Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 19, 2019)