Before the Court were three motions, all of which requested prospective relief against the Debtor based on her alleged bad faith conduct.  There were two motions seeking relief from the automatic stay filed by separate parties and a motion to dismiss requesting the imposition of a two-year bar to refiling.  The Court found that the three motions – all of which were predicated on the Debtor’s bad faith in filing her bankruptcy case and her on-going abuse of the provisions, purpose, and spirit of the Bankruptcy Code – requested or contemplated extraordinary relief.  Nevertheless, as set forth in its 101-page opinion, the Court determined that not only was extraordinary relief warranted but also necessary to prevent (or, at least, curtail) further prejudice to creditors and parties in interest.  The Court found that, for eight years, the Debtor and her spouse have exploited, manipulated, and abused the bankruptcy process to hinder and delay creditors from enforcing their security interests or otherwise pursuing their claims all while forcing those same creditors to incur substantial legal fees to protect their interests in various state and federal courts.  The Court granted all three motions and imposed prospective relief, including the imposition of an equitable servitude on all real property in which the Debtor has an ownership and/or possessory interest for a period of four years after the date that the order becomes final and nonappealable.

Much of the opinion details the years-long saga of the creditors attempting to enforce their rights and the Debtor and her husband manipulating the bankruptcy and litigation processes to interfere with the creditors’ rights, but it also discusses the current state of the law on standing of a lienholder, Chapter 13 eligibility, diligence in preparing schedules, limitations for a foreclosure action, dismissal under Section 1307(b) and (c), the good faith standard for a Chapter 13 debtor, the authority of the Court to dismiss a case with a bar to refiling, bad faith as cause for terminating the automatic stay under Section 362(d)(1), and imposition of an equitable servitude under Sections 105(a) and 362(d)(4).