United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division
IN RE EMMANUEL O. MAINOO, Debtor,
COMERICA BANK, Appellee. EMMANUEL O. MAINOO, Appellant, District Court No. 4:17-CV-232-A
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MCBRYDE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
action is before the court as an appeal from an order of the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of
Texas, Fort Worth Division, the Honorable Mark X. Mullin
presiding. Having considered the briefs of appellant,
Emmanuel 0. Mainoo ("Debtor"), and appellee,
Comerica Bank ("Comerica"), the record on appeal,
and applicable authorities, the court finds that the
bankruptcy court's order should be affirmed.
appeal is from a bankruptcy court order signed February 2,
2017, granting Comerica relief from stay. The bankruptcy
court denied Debtor's motion for reconsideration on March
1, 2017. This court's jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C.
December 2002, Debtor purchased real property located at 2546
N. Beltline Road, Arlington, Texas 76011 (the
"Property"}. To finance the purchase, Debtor
executed a U.S. Small Business Administration Note (the
"Note") made payable to Comerica in the original
payable amount of $279, 800.00. The Note was secured by a
Deed of Trust that was filed in the deed records of Dallas
County, Texas on December 30, 2002.
March 5, 2013, Debtor filed a Voluntary Petition for Relief
under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. Debtor disclosed
that he held an interest in the Property but did not disclose
that the Property was subject to a secured lien held by
Comerica. Rather, Debtor listed Comerica as an unsecured
creditor with a claim of $267, 387.
filed a Chapter 13 Plan and Motion for Valuation (the
"Plan") on March 13, 2013, again listing Comerica
as an unsecured creditor and omitting the existence of the
secured lien. Comerica did not file a Proof of Claim or
object to Debtor's plan, and the plan was confirmed.
three years after the Plan was confirmed, Comerica filed a
motion in the bankruptcy court to terminate the automatic
stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), asserting that it
was a secured creditor with a claim of at least $345, 747.14,
which was secured by a valid and perfected lien in the
Property. In response, Debtor argued that the stay should not
be lifted because the lien was void and unenforceable. Debtor
contended that his signature on the Deed of Trust was forged,
Comerica waived its right to enforce the lien by failing to
object to the Plan, and that the statute of limitations had
expired, among other things. After full briefing and a
hearing, the bankruptcy court granted Comerica's motion
for relief from stay.
on Appeal The six issues that Debtor presents on appeal
1. Whether the bankruptcy court's determination that the
Debtor signed a deed of trust is clearly erroneous as
[Comerica] presented no testimony or other evidence
contradicting the Debtor's claim of forgery, and ...