Tuesday, February 26, 2013

How To Lift Half the World

from PBS




Perhaps new forms of advocacy and different types of activists can help us re-frame thinking about inequality from a problem for women to a problem for humans.

Above, a laborer in South India earns money for her child by carrying bricks and mortar on her head all day. Center, social activist Medha Patkar and below, a “video volunteer.”
Above, a laborer in South India earns money for her child by carrying bricks and mortar on her head all day. Center, social activist Medha Patkar and below, a “video volunteer.”
In the past few weeks and months, I've mentioned women on my nightly contributions to the NewsHour programs—at times in their struggles for equality, despite the atrocities they endure. There is the story of Malala Yousafzai recovering after the Taliban shot her in the head for being an advocate for girls education, the Billion Rising movement on Valentine's day that found new energy in India after the tragic gang rape in Delhi, or more recently, the spotlight on violence against women in South Africa in the wake of the tragic murder of Reeva Steenkamp. When the set lights go dark, and I'm taking my microphone off, I am often perplexed that half the population on the planet still has to fight to be heard, to be treated with dignity, to get a fair shot.
Perhaps I'm at times dumbfounded because in my first and second grade class in India, in a room of more than 70 students, I was competing with everything I had for the No. 1 ranking with a young woman named Uma. Maybe it is in that competition where I assumed naively that girls and women would always be my equal competitors.
It did not take long for me growing up in India to recognize how lopsidedly unequal situations were for women outside that classroom. While my worldview may have shifted by immigrating to the U.S., I've become aware of the gender inequities of the developing world as well, and often glanced to my motherland to see women rising and leading masses and movements in a culture which is very slowly beginning to accept the reality. Rather than picking a particular woman, I'd like to highlight what I'd say are classes of inspirational activists.
Medha Patkar crossed my radar in the 90s when she was working furiously to stop dams on the Narmada River. She lobbied for the hundreds of thousands of people living upstream who would be flooded out of their homes. While the occasional celebrity activist has joined her cause, her efforts have continued for decades and she has survived arrests and hunger strikes as she continued to become a voice for so many who had no chance to be heard. What was considered her radicalism has now become a countervailing voice thanks in part through prestigious international awards and recognition. But there are legions more who have less recognition and are still doing stellar work.
Run through the archives at the NewsHour and through Fred De Sam Lazaro's pieces and you’ll find the story of Sunita Krishnan, a tireless activist who along with her non-profitPrajwala fights the realities of commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking in India. Check out a powerful TED talk by Krishnan where shedetails the lives of some of the victims and pleads with the audience not for our pity but for our acceptance of these victims as fellow humans. Given the recent report by Human Rights Watch on child sexual abuse in India, Krishnan's work will not end soon. A decade ago Fred also profiledDr. Suniti Solomon, a doctor who was part of the team that documented the first cases of HIV in India and who is still working to help destigmatize being HIV positive. Dr. Solomon was profiled in a recent film about a culture of intermarriage between HIV positive individuals in India.
There are quieter tiers of activists who are incredibly effective in their own focused corners. In 2003 I visited the Banyan, a woman-run non-profit in Chennai India that focuses on helping homeless and mentally ill women (mostly) get off the streets. The patients are castaways from families who don't want them or can't care for them, and they endure abuse of almost every kind on the streets, but somehow this agency manages to reach out, care for, and often stabilize women through medical and psychological treatment. I was also inspired by the Sylvia Wright Trust whose namesake has been tirelessly working in rural South India for more than three decades. She started with a medical van and now has built schools for deaf and disabled children who were often times castaways and one of the highest caliber hospitals in the area. This former nurse from Leeds has even built a nursing college which will continue her legacy.
The stories of the Sylvia Wrights, the Banyans, and any of these change agents would not be heard were it not for what I consider the amplifying class of activist. I'm inspired by the engagement techniques and campaigns spearheaded by Mallika Dutt and her organization Breakthrough. From Facebook Games to promise campaigns, she is helping "ring the bell" and raise awareness of gender violence, women's human rights and immigration. Documentary journalists like Sharmeed Obaid Chinoy tell powerful stories and sometimes are rewarded with widespread accolades as she was with her Oscar last year. Did the recognition stop the practice of Acid attacks? No—but do a billion more people on the planet at least know that the atrocity exists? Yes. There are also grassroots enablers like Jessica Mayberry of Video Volunteers who are capitalizing on the falling prices for cameras and digital storytelling tools, and are enabling and empowering women, the poor and the disenfranchised to begin telling their own stories.
I also wonder whether we are at the beginning of a more significant groundswell of awareness of women's issues. The same forces which fuel all of the campaigns that comprise the marketplace of ideas are enabling stories of gender violence and inequality to spread farther and faster. From social media calls to action to non-profit campaigns to educate women and girls, they are all competing for our most valuable diminishing resource—time. The difference I'm noticing is that in the past couple of years, it seems these campaigns are winning more of my attention. I wonder whether this conversation goes "viral" and infects the consciousness of us all, more powerfully than the gun debate or climate change or education, or any number of issues. Because If I can reframe thinking of inequality as a gender-centric set of conditions, lift it out of a box I may have placed it in within my own head, and perhaps begin seeing it as something that affects half the population who will help tackle gun violence, and climate change and education and everything else, perhaps I would feel more urgency to act. Working toward that paradigm shift is why the women I've mentioned and so many others inspire me.
You can subscribe to Hari on Facebook, Google Plus and on Twitter @Hari.
SUPPORT YOUR PBS LOCAL STATION

Friday, February 22, 2013

White Rose: The Germans who tried to topple Hitler

from BBC News


White Rose: The Germans who tried to topple Hitler

Lilo Furst-Ramdohr in 1942 - and today (picture: Domenic Saller)
Seventy years ago today, three German students were executed in Munich for leading a resistance movement against Hitler. Since then, the members of the White Rose group have become German national heroes - Lilo Furst-Ramdohr was one of them.
In 1943, World War II was at its height - but in Munich, the centre of Nazi power, a group of students had started a campaign of passive resistance.
Liselotte Furst-Ramdohr, already a widow at the age of 29 following her husband's death on the Russian front, was introduced to the White Rose group by her friend, Alexander Schmorell.
"I can still see Alex today as he told me about it," says Furst-Ramdohr, now a spry 99-year-old. "He never said the word 'resistance', he just said that the war was dreadful, with the battles and so many people dying, and that Hitler was a megalomaniac, and so they had to do something."

What was the White Rose?

Hans and Sophie Scholl, members of the White Rose resistance group
  • Resistance group formed in 1942 by group of Munich University students and their professor
  • Horrified by Nazism, they wrote and distributed leaflets urging Germans to oppose Hitler's regime
  • Also painted anti-Nazi slogans on buildings around Munich
  • Produced six leaflets before their arrest
Schmorell and his friends Christoph Probst and Hans Scholl had started writing leaflets encouraging Germans to join them in resisting the Nazi regime.
With the help of a small group of collaborators, they distributed the leaflets to addresses selected at random from the phone book.
Furst-Ramdohr says the group couldn't understand how the German people had been so easily led into supporting the Nazi Party and its ideology.
"They must have been able to tell how bad things were, it was ridiculous," she says.
The White Rose delivered the leaflets by hand to addresses in the Munich area, and sent them to other cities through trusted couriers.
Furst-Ramdohr never delivered the leaflets herself but hid them in a broom cupboard in her flat.
She also helped Schmorell make stencils in her flat saying "Down with Hitler", and on the nights of 8 and 15 February, the White Rose graffitied the slogan on walls across Munich.
Furst-Ramdohr remembers the activists - who were risking their lives for their beliefs - as young and naive.
One of the best-known members of the group today is Hans Scholl's younger sister Sophie, later the subject of an Oscar-nominated film, Sophie Scholl: The Final Days. Furst-Ramdohr remembers that Sophie was so scared that she used to sleep in her brother's bed.

'Fight against the Party!'

The sixth leaflet produced by the White Rose was smuggled out of the country and scattered over Germany by Allied planes.
The day of reckoning has come, the reckoning of German youth with the most repellent tyranny our nation has ever seen...
For us there is only one slogan: Fight against the Party! Get out of the party hierarchy, which wants to keep us silent!
The German name will be dishonoured forever if German youth does not rise up, to revenge and atone at once, to destroy their tormentors and build up a new spiritual Europe. Students! The German nation looks to us!
Translation: Lucy Burns
"Hans was very afraid too, but they wanted to keep going for Germany - they loved their country," she says.
On 18 February, Hans and Sophie Scholl set off on their most daring expedition yet. They planned to distribute copies of their sixth - and as it would turn out, final - leaflet at the University of Munich, where students would find them as they came out of lectures.
The siblings left piles of the leaflets around the central stairwell. But as they reached the top of the stairs, Sophie still had a number of leaflets left over - so she threw them over the balcony, to float down to the students below.
She was seen by a caretaker, who called the Gestapo. Hans Scholl had a draft for another leaflet in his pocket, which he attempted to swallow, but the Gestapo were too quick.
The Scholl siblings were arrested and tried in front of an emergency session of the People's Court. They were found guilty and executed by guillotine, along with their friend and collaborator Christoph Probst, on 22 February 1943.
Hans Scholl's last words before he was executed were: "Long live freedom!"
A copy of the sentences against members of the White Rose at the Munich district courtThe Scholls were tried at the People's Court of Law, now Munich's district court
The rest of the White Rose group was thrown into panic. Alexander Schmorell went straight to Lilo Forst-Ramdohr's flat, where she helped him find new clothes and a fake passport. Schmorell attempted to flee to Switzerland but was forced to turn back by heavy snow.
Returning to Munich, he was captured after a former girlfriend recognised him entering an air raid shelter during a bombing raid. He was arrested, and later executed.
Lilo Furst-Ramdohr was herself arrested on 2 March. "Two Gestapo men came to the flat and they turned everything upside down," she says.
"They went through my letters, and then one of them said 'I'm afraid you'll have to come with us'.
"They took me to the Gestapo prison in the Wittelsbach Palais on the tram - they stood behind my seat so I couldn't escape."

Find out more

Sophie Scholl's grave
Lucy Burns interviewed Liselotte Furst-Ramdohr for the BBC World Service programme Witness
Furst-Ramdohr spent a month in Gestapo custody. She was regularly interrogated about her role in the White Rose, but eventually released without charge - a stroke of luck she puts down to her status as a war widow, and to the likelihood that the Gestapo was hoping she would lead them to other co-conspirators. After her release she was followed by the secret police for some time.
She then fled Munich for Aschersleben, near Leipzig, where she married again and opened a puppet theatre.
The final White Rose leaflet was smuggled out of Germany and intercepted by Allied forces, with the result that, in the autumn of 1943, millions of copies were dropped over Germany by Allied aircraft.
Since the end of the war, the members of the White Rose have become celebrated figures, as German society has searched for positive role models from the Nazi period.
But Furst-Ramdohr doesn't like it. "At the time, they'd have had us all executed," she says of the majority of her compatriots.
She now lives alone in a small town outside Munich, where she continued to give dancing lessons up to the age of 86.
Her friend Alexander Schmorell was made a saint by the Russian Orthodox church in 2012.
"He would have laughed out loud if he'd known," says Furst-Ramdohr. "He wasn't a saint - he was just a normal person."
Lucy Burns interviewed Liselotte Furst-Ramdohr for the BBC World Service programme Witness. Listen via BBC iPlayer or browse theWitness podcast archive.
You can follow the Magazine on Twitter and on Facebook

More on This Story

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

FreeDavidHinkson.org: Did Ninth Circuit Violate Supreme Court Law in Hinkson Case?

from prweb.com




Hinkson and his supporters are urging citizens to write letters to Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Kozinski requesting that he personally read the pending Motion for Reconsideration of the denial of a Certificate of Appealability and find out why no written opinion was offered in this last, and crucial, ruling.

  • Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedInEmail a friend
Dr. Hinkson on radio show
"I did not sign Exhibit A. What looks like my signature on Exhibit A is actually the image of my signature that has somehow been superimposed upon the letter. Exhibit A is a forgery." Colonel Woodring in regard to Swisher's military record.
Ouray, Colorado (PRWEB) February 15, 2013
In a letter writing campaign, supporters of Dr. Hinkson are asking Chief Judge Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit to please read the Motion for Reconsideration the denial of Certificate of Appealability. Wesley W. Hoyt (Hinkson's attorney and former prosecutor) maintains that, by law, "the Court was absolutely required to grant a hearing as to newly discovered evidence," namely the perjury conviction of Elven J. Swisher.
FreeDavidHinkson.org spokesperson David Adams and Dr. Hinkson's father, Roland Hinkson are asking if the Ninth Circuit has violated a 1959 Ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court finding that an appellate Court is absolutely mandated to reverse a conviction based on perjured testimony. This is especially true since the testimony of Elven J. Swisher (a convicted felon) was the only evidence used to convict Dr. Hinkson of solicitation of murder.
Chief Judge Kozinski, dissenting (611 F.3d 1098): “...I had underestimated the trust some jurors would have placed in Swisher if they thought he was a decorated combat veteran, and the likely backlash if they had learned he was a fraud....Without Swisher, the government had no case.”
Roland Hinkson states, “My son’s attempts to obtain justice have again been denied when Judges Nguyen and Fisher of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals failed to render the required written opinion when they summarily denied my son his petition for a Certificate of Appealability"* (see Case # 12-35824). According to the Committee on Judicial Conduct failing to state reasons for a decision that disposes of a case is judicial misconduct because the accused has nothing with which to challenge the ruling.
*Statement by Roland C. Hinkson, author: A Cesspool of Judicial Corruption, the David Hinkson Story. A Free Download of the book.
According to court records, this is the history of the case:
2004 – In order to fraudulently obtain benefits, Swisher claimed to Veterans Administration (VA) that he was a highly decorated, wounded combat veteran using forged US military discharge documents.
2005 - Hinkson convicted in Idaho of solicitation for murder based solely on testimony of Swisher – Jury did not find other eight government informants credible (according to trial testimony, each had previously sought financial gain from Hinkson). Swisher wore a replica Purple Heart medal while on the stand.
2007 - A 3-Judge Ninth Circuit panel overturns Hinkson’s conviction finding numerous trial court errors.
2008 - Swisher convicted for making the same false claims of heroism to VA as he did in Hinkson trial.
2009 - Hinkson loses appeal to Ninth Circuit 11-Judge panel and isn’t allowed to introduce Swisher's conviction because Swisher’s case was not final.
2009 - Swisher convictions finalized.
2010 - Hinkson loses appeal 5 to 6 because the Ninth Circuit majority finds that Swisher's perjured testimony made no difference to Hinkson’s 2005 jury (Swisher’s conviction not considered).
2012 – Hinkson’s §2255 Habeas Corpus Petition and Certificate of Appealability denied by trial judge.
2012 – Hinkson’s Certificate of Appealability (COA) summarily denied by Ninth Circuit without written opinion.
2013 - Current Motion for Reconsideration of COA is before the Court.
Roland Hinkson, points out that "each of us has a Constitutional right to freedom. If the government proposes to take away that freedom, it must follow strict rules of due process." According to Hoyt, Supreme Court law requires reversal of the 2005 conviction for solicitation of murder (2005 Idaho Federal Criminal Action No. 1:04-cr-00127) since the only witness the jury found credible was later convicted of perjury, theft of government property, forgery and theft of valor [See US v Swisher CR- 07-182-S-BLW] for the exact same false testimony to the VA as he used before Dr. Hinkson’s jury.
Attorney Hoyt reported that Judge Tallman, "personally subpoenaed the original Swisher 1950s US military file from archives. In spite of the fact that Tallman was holding the authentic record, which was the same record that convicted Swisher of perjury 3 years later, he refused to let the jury see them."
In addition, the Ninth Circuit now has in front of it the affidavit of retired Marine Colonel Woodring clearly stating that his signature on two documents was a forgery.
A post-trial affidavit by a juror stated that if he had known Swisher was a fraud he would not have voted to convict Dr. Hinkson.
Mr. Hoyt points out that “Dr. Hinkson, a naturopath, inventor, philanthropist, entrepreneur, radio talk-show host and founder of WaterOz, a dietary supplement maker, has already spent ten years in prison, including two in solitary.” If not reversed, Dr. Hinkson has 33 more years to serve, effectively a death sentence.
If granted, the COA is the first step in allowing Hinkson to have a hearing to determine the impact of Swisher's subsequent conviction as absolute proof of his perjury before the Hinkson jury. A sample letter to Judge Kozinski is online.

Isaacs' Attorney Tells Court That Automatic Stay Applies

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Monday, September 3, 2012

Still No Justice for Mortgage Abuses


EDITORIAL


  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • GOOGLE+
  • E-MAIL
  • SHARE
  • PRINT
  • REPRINTS
It has been six months since the big banks settled with state and federal officials over evidence of widespread foreclosure fraud, promising to provide $25 billion in mortgage relief in exchange for not being sued over past foreclosure abuses.

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
At the time, it looked like a sweet deal for the banks. The fines were paltry compared with the damage done to homeowners and the economy. And much of the relief the banks were obliged to provide could be met by continuing more or less with business as usual.
It still looks like a sweet deal.
The Office of Mortgage Settlement Oversight, the monitor of the settlement, released a preliminary report last week showing that 138,000 homeowners had received some form of relief from March 1 through June 30. That is roughly the number that would have been expected under various aid programs in effect before the settlement. Worse, with some three million borrowers now in or near foreclosure, according to Moody’s Analytics, it is nowhere near the level of relief needed to fix the housing market.
The type of relief provided — mostly short sales, in which a bank allows a homeowner to sell for less than is owed on the mortgage — had become increasingly common before the settlement.
Short sales are better than foreclosures, in part because they prevent vacancies that depress house values. But they are not punishment for wrongdoing in any meaningful sense; rather, they allow banks to get higher prices for underwater properties than they could have gotten in foreclosure sales.
Nor do they fulfill the settlement’s main purpose: to keep underwater borrowers in their homes by reducing the principal on their mortgage loans. According to the monitor’s report, $8.7 billion of debt has been written off in short sales versus only $750 million of principal reduction from loan modifications.
The settlement was not, of course, intended as a cure for the housing bust. And future progress reports will no doubt show many more homeowners receiving big loan modifications. But, based on the banks’ performance so far, it also seems likely they will be able to structure the required relief in ways designed to tidy up their balance sheets, rather than to save as many homes as possible.
Even the relief that is provided may turn out to be less than meets the eye. That’s because much of the debt forgiven in short sales and loan modifications will be counted as taxable income to the borrowers, creating huge tax bills they will not be able to pay.
Mortgage debt that is forgiven is exempt from taxation under current law, but only if the debt was used to buy or improve the house. The law does not exempt debt forgiven on many home equity loans, even though the foreclosure settlement envisions billions of dollars in modifications to such loans.
Several bills in Congress call for extending the law, which is set to expire at the end of the year. But what is obviously needed is a broader law shielding all forgiven mortgage debt from tax.
Meanwhile, an investigation into the mortgage abuses that led to the financial crisis, promised by President Obama in January, has been slow to produce results. The settlement left open the possibility of civil and criminal suits on mortgage securitizations and other practices that inflated the bubble. The aim is to produce deeper accountability and larger fines with which to provide even more mortgage relief, but no suits have yet been filed.
The economy will not recover and justice will not be done unless and until the mortgage mess is resolved.

Sunday, September 2, 2012

In re: Krista Lynn Purvis Complaint for Violation of Automatic Stay



IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: : CHAPTER SEVEN
:
KRISTA LYNN PURVIS : BANKRUPTCY NO.: 5-11-bk-04996-JJT
aka KRIS PURVIS, :
:
DEBTOR :
:
KRISTA LYNN PURVIS, : {Nature of Proceeding: Defendant’s
: Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for
PLAINTIFF : Violations of the Automatic Stay Pursuant
: to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) and F.R.B.P. 7012(b)
vs. : (Doc. #5)}
:
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF :
PENNSYLVANIA, :
:
DEFENDANT : ADVERSARY NO.: 5-11-ap-00488-JJT
OPINION1
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the underlying Complaint under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) as made applicable to adversary proceedings in
bankruptcy by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7012(b). For the reasons set forth herein,
the Court denies the Motion to Dismiss.
The allegations of the underlying Complaint for Violations of the Automatic Stay can be
summarized as follows. Prior to the filing of the bankruptcy petition of July 18, 2011, the
Defendant scheduled a sheriff sale of Debtor’s property with the Lackawanna County Sheriff’s
Office with said sale being scheduled for October 4, 2011. Subsequent to the filing of the
bankruptcy, the Lackawanna County Sheriff, pursuant to Defendant’s instructions, posted a
Drafted with the assistance of Richard P. Rogers, Law Clerk.
1
[K:\Cathy\Opinions-Orders filed 2012\5-11-ap-00488-JJT_Purvis.pdf]notice on Debtor’s property indicating that the property was to be sold on October 4, 2011.
Thereafter, on three separate occasions namely, September 9, September 16, and September 23,
2011, Debtor’s property was subject to an advertisement in the Scranton Times Tribune and the
Lackawanna County Jurist. The allegations are that the posting of the property and
advertisement of the Sheriff’s sale were all done pursuant to the requirements of a foreclosure
sale process.
2
The Complaint alleges that at all times subsequent to the filing of the underlying
bankruptcy case, the Defendant was aware of the filing of the bankruptcy. On September 15,
2011, Defendant even filed a Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay. It is further alleged
that on the morning of October 4, 2011, the day of the Sheriff’s sale, Defendant instructed the
Sheriff to continue the sale to November 15, 2011. Based upon these factual allegations, the
Plaintiff requests the Court find that the Defendant violated 11 U.S.C. § 362(a), and as a result of
that violation, she should be awarded actual damages including costs, attorney’s fees, and
punitive damages. Defendant’s response attacks the allegations of the Complaint on several
avenues. First, Defendant argues that in order to receive damages, the Plaintiff must prove the
Defendant willfully violated the automatic stay, and the allegations of the Complaint falls short
in this regard. Defendant also asserts that both Pennsylvania State law and Bankruptcy lawis
clear that a scheduled Sheriff’s sale can be continued post-petition without there being a violation
of the automatic stay. Furthermore, the rescheduling of the sale is not a violation because the
In addition to the posting and advertising of the Debtor’s property at 82 Pike Street, Carbondale,
2
Pennsylvania, was the Plaintiff’s/Debtor’s parents’ property at 99 Pike Street, Carbondale, Pennsylvania. Debtor’s
parents are not debtors under the United States Bankruptcy Code, and Defendant was informed that the 99 Pike
Street property was incorrectly included in the foreclosure proceedings.
[K:\Cathy\Opinions-Orders filed 2012\5-11-ap-00488-JJT_Purvis.pdf] 2action simply maintains the “status quo” between the debtor and the creditor. Closely tied to this
argument is that the Defendant took no affirmative action in violation of the stay but that it was
the Sheriff of Lackawanna County who did the postings for the sale.
In considering a motion to dismiss, the Rule is that “once a claim has been stated
adequately, it may be supported by showing any set of facts consistent with the allegations of the
complaint.” Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 231 (3d Cir. 2008) citing Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 554, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 at 1969 (2007).
“Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .”
Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1965.
The Court will “accept all factual allegations as true, construe the complaint in the light
most favorable to the plaintiff, and determine whether, under any reasonable reading of the
complaint, the plaintiff may be entitled to relief.” Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d at
233 citing Twombly, 127 S.Ct. at 1969 n.8 and Pinker v. Roche Holdings, Ltd., 292 F.3d 361,
374 n.7 (3d Cir. 2002).
The Plaintiff points outs that Defendant concentrates its argument solely on whether the
oral continuance of the Sheriff’s sale on October 4, 2011, served to protect the “status quo”
vis-à-vis the parties, while ignoring the impact the posting and triple advertisement of the
Sheriff’s sale in local papers may have had on the automatic stay. Defendant, however, deflected
attention from itself by indicating that it was actually the Sheriff that did the posting and the
advertising and minimized any responsibility of the Defendant in the state procedures leading to
the Sheriff’s sale, all the while ignoring the fact that the Sheriff operates at the behest of the
Defendant.
[K:\Cathy\Opinions-Orders filed 2012\5-11-ap-00488-JJT_Purvis.pdf] 3Defendant also asserts the Debtor cannot and has not set forth any damages that occurred
to her as a result of the Sheriff’s sale being advertised or in the bankruptcy. We direct the
Defendant’s attention to paragraphs 29 and 30 of the Complaint which set forth the allegations of
Plaintiff’s damages, and we find that under our previous rulings in the Solfanelli case at
Solfanelli v. Meridian Bank (In re Solfanelli), 206 B.R. 699, 703 (Bankr. M.D.Pa.. 1996), aff’d in
part, rev’d in part, In re Solfanelli, 230 B.R. 54 (M.D.Pa. 1999), judgment aff’d and remanded,
Solfanelli v. Corestates Bank, N.A., 203 F.3d 197 (3d Cir. 2000), sufficient allegations remain in
support of the allegation of damages.
It is for these reasons that the Court finds the instant Complaint survives the requirements
of a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion as set forth in Twombly, supra, and the Court will deny the instant
Motion to Dismiss. The Court will further Order the Defendant to file an Answer to the
Complaint on or within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.
My Order will follow.
Date: May 30, 2012
[K:\Cathy\Opinions-Orders filed 2012\5-11-ap-00488-JJT_Purvis.pdf] 4IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: : CHAPTER SEVEN
:
KRISTA LYNN PURVIS : BANKRUPTCY NO.: 5-11-bk-04996-JJT
aka KRIS PURVIS, :
:
DEBTOR :
:
KRISTA LYNN PURVIS, : {Nature of Proceeding: Defendant’s
: Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for
PLAINTIFF : Violations of the Automatic Stay Pursuant
: to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) and F.R.B.P. 7012(b)
vs. : (Doc. #5)}
:
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF :
PENNSYLVANIA, :
:
DEFENDANT : ADVERSARY NO.: 5-11-ap-00488-JJT
ORDER
For those reasons indicated in the Opinion filed this date, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for Violations of
the Automatic Stay, (Doc. #5), is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall an Answer to the Complaint on or
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.
Date: May 30, 2012
[K:\Cathy\Opinions-Orders filed 2012\5-11-ap-00488-JJT_Purvis.pdf