UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

IN RE:

SAMUEL FITZGERALD WORRELL,

Debtor.

_________________________________/

CASE NO.: 21-20622-PDR

CHAPTER 13

MOTION FOR PROSPECTIVE IN-REM RELIEF FROM 

AUTOMATIC STAY FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS

COMES NOW, NEWREZ LLC D/B/A SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING 

("Secured Creditor”), by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby moves this Court, pursuant 

to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), for a modification of the automatic stay provisions for cause with 

prospective in rem relief as applied to the subject property for a period of two years, and, in support 

thereof, states the following:

1. Debtor, Samuel Fitzgerald Worrell (“Debtor”), filed a voluntary petition pursuant to 

Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code on November 5, 2021.

2. Secured Creditor holds a security interest in the Debtor’s real property located at 

7420 NW 41st CT., Lauderhill, FL 33319.

3. Upon belief and information that the Property is Debtor’s primary residence.

4. Jurisdiction of this cause is granted to the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1334, 11 U.S.C. § 362(d), Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4001(a), and all other applicable rules 

and statutes affecting the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Courts generally.

5. Secured Creditor hereby waives the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 362(e). The 

automatic stay of any act against property of the estate under § 362(a) shall continue 

until this Court orders or the stay is otherwise terminated by operation of law.

MORTGAGE BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

6. On January 23, 2006, Samuel H Worrell and Donna L Worrell (the “Borrowers”) 

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 1 of 7
executed and delivered an Adjustable Rate Note ("Note") and an Adjustable Rate 

Home Mortgage (“Mortgage”) securing payment of the Note with a principal 

amount of $337,500.00. The Mortgage was recorded on February 2, 2006 in Book 

41390 at Page 825 -842 in the Public Records of Broward County, Florida. The loan 

was transferred to Secured Creditor.

7. Secured Creditor filed a foreclosure complaint against the Debtor on February 2, 

2016 in the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward 

County, Case Number: CACE-16-001954, due to the default under the terms of the 

Note and Mortgage on the property securing Secured Creditor’s interest in certain 

real property legally described as:

This property is located at the street address of: 7420 NW 41ST CT., Lauderhill, 

FL 33319. A copy of the foreclosure docket is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

8. On February 22, 2018, Secured Creditor obtained a Final Judgment of Foreclosure 

in the amount of $508,318.62. A copy of the Final Judgment is attached hereto as 

Exhibit “B.” The Final Judgment remains unpaid.

9. The foreclosure sale date was initially set for June 21, 2018.

BANKRUPTCY PETITION NO. 1 – BK CASE 18-19013-JKO

10. On July 26, 2018, Debtor filed his first Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition, Case 

Number 18-19013-JKO.

11. The bankruptcy was ultimately dismissed on April 24, 2019 (DE# 38) for failure to 

make plan payments

BANKRUPTCY PETITION NO. 2 – BK CASE 19-21221-JKO

12. On August 22, 2019, Debtor filed his second Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Petition, Case 

No. 19-21221-JKO. 

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 2 of 7
13. Again, the case was ultimately dismissed on October 25, 2019 (DE# 20) due to the 

failure to make plan payments. 

BANKRUPTCY PETITION NO. 3 – BK CASE 20-11803-PGH

14. On February 11, 2020, again the Debtor filed his third Chapter 13 Bankruptcy 

Petition Case No. 20-11803-PGH. 

15. The Debtor was subsequently dismissed on April 27, 2020 for failure to make plan 

payments (ECF #22).

REQUEST FOR PROSPECTIVE RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY

16. Secured Creditor requests that the Court grant it prospective in rem relief from the 

automatic stay pursuant to 362(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code for a period of at least 

two (2) years so that no stay can be imposed as to the subject property by any future 

bankruptcy filing by any person or entity. Secured Creditor submits that the 

aforementioned described bad faith shown by the Debtor along with other heirs of 

the borrower were done solely for the purpose of using the bankruptcy stay 

provisions to delay the foreclosure sale of the Subject Property and constitute 

grounds for prospective in rem relief. 

17. Secured Creditor submits that it is entitled to prospective relief from the automatic 

stay for cause, to wit, the lengthy history of bankruptcy filings and filing of the 

instant bankruptcy petition, which filings evidence a lack of good faith. See In re 

Waldron, 785 F.2d 936, 941 (11th Cir. 1986) (“whenever a Chapter 13 petition 

appears to be tainted by a questionable purpose, it is incumbent upon the bankruptcy 

courts to examine and question the Debtor’s motives”). 

18. The Bankruptcy Code does not define good faith nor is there an explicit requirement 

that petitions be filed in good faith; yet, bankruptcy courts have repeatedly lifted the 

automatic stay and dismissed cases as bad faith filings. The inference that good faith 

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 3 of 7
is required in order for Debtors to continue to enjoy the exceptional relief afforded 

by the automatic stay and the other provisions of the Code upholds the integrity of 

the bankruptcy courts:

Every bankruptcy statute since 1898 has incorporated literally, or by judicial 

interpretation, a standard of good faith for the commencement, prosecution, and 

confirmation of bankruptcy proceedings. Such a standard furthers the balancing 

process between the interest of Debtors and creditors which characterizes so many 

provisions of the bankruptcy laws and is necessary to legitimize the delay and costs 

imposed upon parties to a bankruptcy. Requirement of good faith prevents abuse 

of the bankruptcy process by Debtors whose overriding motive is to delay creditors 

without benefitting them in any way or to achieve reprehensible purposes. 

Moreover, a good faith standard protects the jurisdictional integrity of the 

bankruptcy courts by rendering their most powerful equitable weapons (i.e., 

avoidance of liens, discharge of debts, marshaling and turnover of assets) available 

only to those Debtors and creditors with “clean hands.”

In re Little Creek Dev. Co., 779 F.2d 1068, 1071-72 (5th Cir. 1986) (citations omitted). 

See also In re Waldron, 785 F.2d 936 (11th Cir. 1986).

19. Thus, a debtor has a duty to act without an intent merely to delay or hinder his 

creditors both in the filing of the case and the filing of the plan.

20. All of the Circuit Courts have embraced a “totality of the circumstances” approach 

to analyzing good faith, which involves consideration of a number of factors related 

to the contents of a Debtor’s plan as well as conduct of the Debtor, following the 

Eighth Circuit’s lead in In re Estus, 695 F.2d 311 (8th Cir. 1982), and the Eleventh 

Circuit’s later analysis in In re Kitchens, 702 F.2d 885 (11th Cir. 1983).

21. Secured Creditor respectfully suggests Debtor’s actions are indicative of the 

intention to delay and hinder Secured Creditor without benefit. These actions are in 

contravention of the Bankruptcy Code’s good faith provision, which serves to 

prevent the bankruptcy forum from becoming a revolving door for Debtor who, 

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 4 of 7
without any real ability or serious intention of abiding by the duties imposed by Title 

11, seek only to delay just process.

22. It is clear from the history of the Mortgage account that the Debtor and his relatives 

either do not have the ability or do not intend to make payments to Secured Creditor.

23. Secured Creditor’s security interest in the subject property is being significantly 

jeopardized by the Debtor(s)’ failure to comply with the terms of the subject loan 

documents while Secured Creditor is prohibited from pursuing lawful remedies to 

protect such interest. Secured Creditor has no protection against the erosion of its 

collateral position and no other form of adequate protection is provided.

24. Secured Creditor respectfully requests this Court grant it prospective in rem relief 

from the Automatic Stay in this case pursuant to §362(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, 

for cause, namely the lack of adequate protection to Secured Creditor for its interest 

in the above stated collateral. The value of the collateral is insufficient in and of 

itself to provide adequate protection which the Bankruptcy Code requires to be 

provided to the Secured Creditor. Secured Creditor additionally seeks relief from the 

Automatic Stay pursuant to §362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, as the collateral is 

unnecessary to an effective reorganization of the Debtor’s assets.

25. Once the stay is terminated, the Debtor will have minimal motivation to insure, 

preserve, or protect the collateral; therefore, Secured Creditor requests that the Court 

waive the 14-day stay period imposed by Fed.R.Bankr.P. 4001(a)(3).

26. Secured Creditor has incurred court costs and attorney’s fees in this proceeding and 

will incur additional fees, costs and expenses in foreclosing the Mortgage and in 

preserving and protecting the property, all of which additional sums are secured by 

the lien of the mortgage. Secured Creditor seeks an award of its reasonable 

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 5 of 7
attorneys’ fees and costs, or alternatively, leave to seek recovery of its reasonable 

attorneys’ fees and costs in any pending or subsequent foreclosure proceeding.

WHEREFORE, Secured Creditor prays this Honorable Court enter an order modifying 

the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) for a period of two (2) years to permit Secured 

Creditor to take any and all steps necessary to exercise any and all rights it may have in the 

collateral described herein, to gain possession of said collateral, to waive the 14-day stay imposed 

by Fed.R.Bankr.P. 4001(a)(3), to seek recovery of its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred 

in this proceeding, and to any such further relief as this Honorable Court deems just and 

appropriate.

Respectfully Submitted,

ROBERTSON, ANSCHUTZ, SCHNEID, CRANE 

& PARTNERS, PLLC 

Attorney for Secured Creditor

6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100

Boca Raton, FL 33487

Telephone: 561-241-6901

Facsimile: 561-997-6909

By: /s/April Harriott

April Harriott, Esquire

FL Bar Number 37547

Email: aharriott@raslg.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 19, 2022, I caused to be electronically filed the 

foregoing with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system, and a true and correct copy has 

been served via CM/ECF or United States Mail to the following parties:

Samuel Fitzgerald Worrell, PRO SE

7420 NW 41 Ct

Lauderhill, FL 33319

Robin R Weiner

POB 559007

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33355

Office of the US Trustee

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 6 of 7
51 S.W. 1st Ave.

Suite 1204

Miami, FL 33130

ROBERTSON, ANSCHUTZ, SCHNEID, CRANE 

& PARTNERS, PLLC 

Attorney for Secured Creditor

6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100

Boca Raton, FL 33487

Telephone: 561-241-6901

Facsimile: 561-997-6909

By: /s/April Harriott

April Harriott, Esquire

FL Bar Number 37547

Email: aharriott@raslg.com

Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 26 Filed 01/19/22 Page 7 of 7