Legal Opinion
Peare v. Jackson
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 2, 2001No. 99-FM-373PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GLICKMAN, Associate Judge.
The Superior Court found Charles S. Peare in civil contempt for his failure to make court-ordered support payments pendente lite to his wife Delores Jackson. In his pro se appeal from that judgment, Peare claims, inter alia, that he had filed a bankruptcy petition and was under what he calls the “blanket protection” of the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 362 (1994 & Supp. V 1999). Despite the overbreadth of this claim, as Peare articulates it, there is enough merit in it to entitle him to relief. Although a bankruptcy filing does not stay…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- International Union, United Mine Workers v. BagwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Kalb v. FeuersteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Soares v. Brockton Credit UnionCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
- Robert A. Sikes and Janice K. Sikes v. Global Marine, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- Edward Carver v. Paulette Carver, Gasper L. Toole, Iii, Frampton W. Toole, Iii, and Richard L. PearceCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kibunja v. Alturas, L.L.C.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- Jones v. CainDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Jones v. CainDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002