Redmond v. Fifth Third Bank

Dist. Ct. did not err in affirming Bankruptcy Ct. order denying debtor's second motion to reopen his Chapter 13 proceeding that had been filed one year after first motion to reopen had been denied and five years after said bankruptcy proceedings had been closed. While debtor argued that reopening of bankruptcy proceeding was warranted because creditor was attempting to collect on pre-petition debts by issuing mortgage pay-off letter and by seeking foreclosure on debtor's property, second motion to reopen was untimely. Moreover, creditor's actions did not violate terms of approved bankruptcy plan since: (1) mere issuance of pay-off letter was not attempt to collect on pre-petition debt; and (2) filing of foreclosure action did not did not violate any bankruptcy court plan calling for debtor's continued payment of mortgage since automatic stay was not in effect at time debtor defaulted on said mortgage for second time.