Circuit split · bankruptcy law
Whether actions taken in violation of the bankruptcy automatic stay are void or merely voidable
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- Bronson v. United States46 F3D 1573
January 26, 1995
“There a split among the circuits as to the ensuing validity of actions in violation of an automatic stay and there is confusion in the use of the terms used to characterize the subsequent force and effect of these actions.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →
The provision at issue
11 U.S.C. § 362 — Automatic stay
“(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a petition filed under section 301, 302, or 303 of this title, or an application filed under section 5(a)(3) of the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, operates as a stay, applicable to all entities, of— (1) the commencement or continuation, including the issuance or employment of process, of a judicial, administrative, or other action or proceeding against the debtor that was or could have been commenced before the commencement of the case under this title, or to recover a …”Read the full section →
What the split turns on
- Anchor precedents:
- Kalb v. Feuerstein308 U.S. 433
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. See all circuit splits.