Legal Opinion · Dissent

Green Hill Corporation v. Charles C. Kim Duak F. Kim Bank of Seoul/new York Agency

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided March 30, 1988No. 87-2041Published

1DissentK.K. Hall, Circuit Judge

I agree with the majority's conclusion that Green Hill did not satisfy Virginia *745state law requirements for the creation of a lien solely by the filing of a memorandum lis pendens. I cannot, however, agree with the majority’s view that this Court is powerless to grant Green Hill’s request for relief from the automatic stay.

While the automatic stay provision of § 362(a)(4) prohibits “any act to create, perfect, or enforce any lien against property of the estate ...,” § 362(b)(3) makes it clear that the filing of a bankruptcy petition does not operate as a stay “of any act to perfect an interest…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Maryland National Bank v. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, in the Matter of Maryland Glass Corporation, DebtorCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1983
  2. In Re Yobe Electric, Inc., Debtor. Yobe Electric, Inc. v. Graybar Electric Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
  3. Hart v. United Virginia Bank (In Re Hart)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · 1982
  4. In Re RidleyUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1985
  5. Matter of Marietta Baptist Tabernacle, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API