MICHAEL WILSON PLC 

Michael G. Wilson (VSB No. 48927) 

12733 Storrow Rd. 

Henrico, VA 23233 

Telephone: (804) 614-8301 

mike@mgwilsonlaw.com 

Counsel to the Plaintiffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

RICHMOND DIVISION 

In re: 

LECLAIRRYAN PLLC, 

Debtor. 

Chapter 7 

Civil Action No. 19-34574 

MOTION FOR LIMITED RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY 

COMES NOW Petersburg Regency LLC (“Petersburg”) and Robert Harmon (“Harmon”; 

together with Petersburg, the “Plaintiffs”) and move this Court for entry of an order, substantially 

in the form attached hereto, granting the Plaintiffs (a) limited relief from the automatic stay 

pursuant to Section 362(d)(1) of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) as 

discussed herein; (b) waiving the fourteen (14) day stay imposed by Rule 4001(a)(3) of the Federal 

Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”); and (c) for certain related relief. In 

support of this Motion, Plaintiffs respectfully state as follows: 

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

1. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 

and the Standing Order of Reference from the United States District Court for the Eastern District 

of Virginia, dated July 10, 1984. 

2. Venue in this Court is appropriate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1409. 

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 6
2 

3. The bases for the relief requested herein are 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) and Bankruptcy 

Rules 4001 and 9014. 

II. BACKGROUND 

4. On September 3, 2019 (“Petition Date”), the above-captioned debtor (the “Debtor”) 

commenced this case by filing a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy 

Code. 

5. In early October of 2019, this case was converted to one under chapter 7 of the 

Bankruptcy Code and Lynn L. Tavenner (the “Trustee”) was appointed as the chapter 7 trustee of 

the Debtor. 

6. The Debtor was founded in 1988 and operated as a national law firm that grew to 

more than 20 offices around the country. On or about July 30, 2019, the Debtor announced that 

the members of the firm had determined to dissolve the firm and wind-down the Debtor’s 

operations. 

7. On May 7, 2019, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of New Jersey 

(the “Petersburg Lawsuit”) against the Debtor and certain attorneys who formerly worked at the 

Debtor, asserting, among others, claims for legal malpractice relating to the Debtor’s 

representation of the Plaintiffs in an underlying litigation matter. 

III. RELIEF REQUESTED 

8. The Plaintiffs request that the Court entered an order, substantially in the form 

attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Order”), granting the Plaintiffs (a) limited relief from the 

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 6
3 

automatic stay pursuant to Section 362(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code to permit the Debtor and its 

insurer to pursue the Petersburg Lawsuit; and (b) waiving the fourteen (14) day stay of the Order 

imposed by Bankruptcy Rule 4001(a)(3). 

IV. ARGUMENT 

9. Section 362(d) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, after notice and a hearing, 

the court shall grant relief from the automatic stay for “cause.” 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1). Congress, 

however, did not define the term “cause” in the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, “Courts must determine 

when discretionary relief is appropriate on a case-by-case basis.” See, e.g., Robbins v. Robbins 

(In re Robbins), 964 F.2d, 342, 345 (4th Cir. 1992) (citations omitted). 

10. The Robbins Court established a three-factor test for courts to sue when 

determining whether “cause” exits: 

(1) whether the issues in the pending litigation involve only state 

law, so the expertise of the bankruptcy court is unnecessary; (2) 

whether modifying the stay will promote judicial economy and 

whether there would be greater interference with the bankruptcy

case if the stay were not lifted because matters would have to be 

litigated in bankruptcy court; and (3) whether the estate can be 

protected properly by a requirement that creditors seek enforcement 

of any judgment through the bankruptcy court. 

Id. 

11. Here, all three factors weigh in favor of grating the relief requested. The claims in 

the Petersburg Lawsuit, including the malpractice claims, all arise under the laws of New Jersey. 

It would be a waste of this Court’s time and the estate’s limited assets to have to litigate the claims 

asserted by the Plaintiffs in the Petersburg Lawsuit. If anything, litigating the Plaintiffs’ claims 

before this Court may impose additional costs and expenses for all parties given that all relevant 

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 6
4 

fact witnesses reside in New Jersey. On the other hand, granting the relief requested herein would 

impose little or no additional burden on the Debtor or the Estate than would be imposed in 

liquidating the claims before this Court, nor will such relief impact any other creditors of the 

Debtor’s estate. 

12. The Plaintiffs seek relief for the sole purpose of permitting the Plaintiffs in the 

Petersburg Lawsuit to reduce those claims to either settlement or judgment, and then to permit the 

Plaintiffs to seek recovery of those amounts from any applicable insurance coverage the Debtor 

may have. 

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 6
5 

V. CONCLUSION 

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, the Plaintiffs request that the Court enter 

the Order granting: (a) limited relief from the automatic stay pursuant to Section 362(d)(1) of the 

Bankruptcy Code to permit the Plaintiffs to reduce those claims to either settlement or judgment, 

and then to permit the Plaintiffs to seek recovery of those amounts from any applicable insurance 

coverage the Debtor may have; and (b) waiving the fourteen (14) day stay of the Order imposed 

by Bankruptcy Rule 4001(a)(3); and (c) granting to the Plaintiffs such other and further relief as 

the Court deems just and proper. 

Dated: December 12, 2019 PETERSBURG REGENCY LLC and 

 ROBERT HARMAN 

/s/ Michael Wilson 

Michael G. Wilson (VSB #48927) 

Michael Wilson PLC 

PO Box 6330 

Glen Allen, VA 23058 

(804) 614-8301 

mike@mgwilsonlaw.com 

 Counsel to the Plaintiffs

 

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 6
6 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on the 12th day of December 2019, I caused a copy of the foregoing 

pleading to be served by electronic means through the Court’s ECF system and emailed to all 

parties receiving notices in this case. 

 /s/ Michael Wilson 

 Michael G. Wilson

Case 19-34574-KRH Doc 287 Filed 12/12/19 Entered 12/12/19 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 6