Richard Paul Glunk

-1-
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN RE: 	RICHARD PAUL GLUNK 	: 	Chapter 7
:
Debtor 	: 	Bky. No. 05-31656ELF
O R D E R
AND NOW, the Debtor having filed a Motion for Confirmation of Relief from the
Automatic Stay to Appeal State Court Judgment, Or, in the Alternative, for Relief from the
Automatic Stay to Appeal State Court Judgment (“the Motion”);
AND, Daniel H. Fledderman and Colleen M. Fledderman (“the Respondents”) having
filed a Response to the Motion;
AND, the court having scheduled a hearing on the Motion on an expedited basis at the
Debtor’s request;
AND, a hearing on the Motion having been held on November 19, 2008;
AND, by Order dated June 12, 2006 (“the June 12 	Order) (Docket Entry No. 39), theth
court having granted relief from the automatic stay, 11 U.S.C. §362(a), allowing the Respondents
to resume prosecution of the action Fledderman v. Glunk, No. 3619, August Term 2001 (C.P.
Phila.) (“the State Court Action”), but such Order otherwise having left the automatic stay, “in
full force and effect,” see June 12 	Order ¶2.c.;th
AND, no discharge having been entered in this case under 11 U.S.C. §727(a) and
therefore, the automatic remaining in effect, see generally 11 U.S.C. §362(c)(1), (2) (stay
terminates upon entry of discharge except as to actions against property of the estate);
Case 05-31656-elf Doc 68 Filed 11/19/08 Entered 11/20/08 11:19:52 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 4

-2-
AND, a judgment having been entered in favor of the Respondents and against the Debtor
in the State Court Action (“the Judgment”);
AND, the Debtor having requested relief from the automatic stay (to the extent such relief
is not implicit in the June 12 	Order) to file an appeal from the Judgment;th
AND, at the hearing on the Motion, the Debtor having requested clarification of the scope
of the June 12 	Order and additional relief, if necessary, in the form of an order staying theth
Respondents from engaging in any collection action with respect to the Judgment, specifically
the transfer of the Judgment from Philadelphia County to a court in another jurisdiction;
AND, at the hearing, the Respondents having consented to a ruling on the merits of the
Debtor’s request for additional relief without the necessity of a separate written request, motion
or adversary complaint therefor, see Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7001(7); Matter of Pence, 905 F.2d 1107,
1109 (7 	Cir. 1990); In re Thomas, 2007 WL 1079980, at *5 n.4 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. Apr. 5, 2007);th
In re Woods, 316 B.R. 522, 527 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2004);
AND, after having considered the parties’ arguments,
It is hereby ORDERED and DETERMINED that:
1. 	The Motion is GRANTED.
2. 	The Debtor is granted relief from the automatic stay to assert any and all appellate rights
available to him under applicable state law in connection with the State Court Action.
3. 	Pursuant to the June 12 	Order, the Respondents may assert any and all appellate rightsth
Case 05-31656-elf Doc 68 Filed 11/19/08 Entered 11/20/08 11:19:52 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 4

The June 12 	Order is ambiguous insofar as it granted relief to the Respondents to	th	1
prosecute the State Court Action to “final judgment.” The concept of “finality” may mean different
things in different contexts (e.g., finality for purposes of the application of collateral estoppel; finality
for purposes of the appealability of a court order; finality in the sense that no further direct appeals may
be taken from a court order due to the passage of time or the rendering of a decision by the highest court
to which an appeal may be made). Paragraph 3 of this Order clarifies that the June 12 	Order was	th
intended to grant the Respondents relief in the last sense described in the parenthetical in the preceding
sentence – i.e., to prosecute or defend all appeals in the State Court Action to the point where no further
direct appeals could be taken.
-3-
available to them under applicable state law in connection with the State Court Action. 1
4. 	To the extent that Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4001(a)(3) applies, its provisions are waived and the
parties may exercise their rights under ¶¶2-3 above forthwith.
5. 	Pursuant to the automatic stay, which was unaffected by the June 12 	Order in this regard,th
the Respondents are stayed from any post-judgment execution on the Judgment (including,
but not limited to, the transfer of such judgment to a jurisdiction outside of Philadelphia
County).
6. 	Paragraph 5 of this Order shall remain in effect unless and until expressly modified by further
Order of this court.
7. 	Paragraph 5 shall remain in effect following the entry of an Order of Discharge under 11
U.S.C. §727(a), subject to Paragraph 8 below.
8. 	If this court enters an Order in the adversary proceeding docketed as Adv. No. 05-0700
(Bankr. E.D. Pa.) determining that the Debtor’s debt to the Respondents is nondischargeable
under 11 U.S.C. §523(a), Paragraphs 5-7 above shall terminate forthwith.
9. 	Nothing in this Order shall preclude either party from seeking a modification of its terms
based on newly discovered evidence or changed circumstances.
Case 05-31656-elf Doc 68 Filed 11/19/08 Entered 11/20/08 11:19:52 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 4

-4-
Date: November 20, 2008
ERIC L. FRANK
U.S. BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
Case 05-31656-elf Doc 68 Filed 11/19/08 Entered 11/20/08 11:19:52 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 4