UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

In re: Case No.:21-17336-MAM 

Chapter 12

ANISA NAZAROVA

Debtor.

/

DEER RUN PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

CHAPTER 12 CASE WITH PREJUDICE FOR BAD FAITH FILING AND FOR ORDER 

GRANTING PROSPECTIVE RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY

Secured Creditor, DEER RUN PROPERTY OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, INC. (“Deer 

Run” or “Secured Creditor”), by and through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 

§§1208, 362(d) and 105(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, moves this Court to dismiss this 

Chapter 12 Bankruptcy with prejudice as filed in bad faith by the Debtor, ANISA NAZAROVA, 

and/or grant Deer Run in rem prospective relief from the automatic stay for a minimum of two (2) 

years for the reasons that follow:

BACKGROUND AND FACTUAL BASIS FOR DISMISSAL OF DEBTOR’S 

CHAPTER 12 CASE FOR BAD FAITH FILING

1. The Debtor here seeks to avail herself of the bankruptcy protections and relief 

provided by Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code. 

2. Deer Run is a Florida not for profit corporation and homeowners’ association under 

Chapter 720, Florida Statutes. It is the corporate entity responsible for the operation, management,

and maintenance of the Deer Run residential community located in Palm Beach County, Florida, 

pursuant to and in accordance with its recorded Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and 

Conditions and other governing documents, as amended from time to time (Governing 

Documents”). 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 1 of 17
3. Deer Run Association is a Secured Creditor pursuant to applicable state law relative 

to the real property that the Debtor claims an interest in her Chapter 12 bankruptcy petition. 

4. Although this is the Debtor’s first Chapter 12 filing, the instant case is the fifth 

bankruptcy case filed that has impacted Deer Run as a Secured Creditor relative to the following 

described real property (the “Subject Property”):

Lot 122, DEER RUN, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 

35, Page 34 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.

5. The Debtor is apparently a Russian Citizen, who, based upon information and 

belief, has never resided at the Subject Property. Nevertheless, through her Chapter 12 Petition, 

the Debtor claims an interest in the Subject Property, by claiming she is the sole proprietor of a 

full time or part time business and listing the Subject Property as a “family farm”. (See Doc.#1 

Part 3 at p. 4).

6. The Debtor also listed Deer Run, PNC Bank, N.A. (PNC) and Fidelity National 

Title Group Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company (Fidelity), as creditors on her creditor 

service matrix pursuant to Local Rule 1007-2.

7. When the Debtor filed her Chapter 12 case, she did not (i) execute her initial petition 

for relief under Chapter 12 of the Code, or file a Summary of Assets and Liabilities, Schedules AJ, Schedule of Financial Affairs, Declaration Concerning Debtors Schedules, or Payment Advices 

(See Doc# 6).

8. In essence, the Debtor’s Chapter 12 filing was substantially if not completely 

deficient in contravention of the Bankruptcy Code and Local Rules. 

9. The Debtor than sought two extensions of time to satisfy her basic filing 

requirements. (See Docs. #17 & #23).

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 2 of 17
10. While the Debtor’s first ex parte motion for extension was granted as a matter of 

course (Doc.#22), the Debtor’s second motion was denied by the Court. (Doc. # 30).

11. This prompted the Debtor’s counsel to move to withdraw (Doc. #32).

12. As such, during the short life of this Chapter 12 case, the Debtor has already 

engaged in unreasonable delay that is prejudicial to Deer Run, as a Secured Creditor of the Subject 

Property. 

13. Moreover, the date and time the Debtor filed her Chapter 12 petition was earlier the 

same day as Deer Run’s scheduled evidentiary hearing in its state court foreclosure action against 

the Subject Property to determine the amounts of attorneys’ fees and costs awardable to Deer Run. 

Deer Run believes this Chapter 12 filing was for the purpose of thwarting that hearing from 

proceeding. 

HISTORY OF BANKRUPTCY FILINGS BY LILIA RUSSO BELKOVA

14. Lillia Russo Belkova (Belkova) has claimed to be the daughter of the Debtor in 

other court proceedings involving PNC and is being represented by the same attorney as the Debtor 

in this Chapter 12 case before the Court granted Debtor’s counsel permission to withdraw.1

15. In addition, Belkova holds title to the Subject Property by virtue of being the 

“Successor Trustee of the Land Trust Agreement No. 072003 dated 2/9/04”. A true copy of the 

Quit Claim Deed recorded at Official Record Book 24985, Page 1196 of the Public Records of 

Palm Beach County, Florida is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and a copy of the Land Trust 

1 Deer Run refers to Belkova as the Debtor’s daughter throughout this motion, however, has no 

actual proof the Debtor is in fact Belkova’s mother. Rather, Belkova has made this representation 

to multiple courts through her numerous bankruptcy filings and related adversary proceedings and 

appeals.

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 3 of 17
Agreement that has been relied upon by Belkova as the basis for her legal and equitable title to the 

Subject Property is attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”

16. On October 6, 2011, Belkova filed for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy 

Code in the Middle District of Florida, commencing case number 11-07333-JAF (the “First 

Bankruptcy Case”). 

17. The First Bankruptcy Case imposed a stay on Deer Run proceeding in state court 

against Belkova in a case that was originally filed in 2007 against the prior owner of the property, 

Joseph M. Hanratty, As Trustee of Land Trust Agreement No. 07200 Dated 02/09/04. This state 

court case is Case No. 2007CA001321 (the “Deer Run 2007 State Court Lawsuit”). This case 

was filed to seek injunctive relief to compel the owner of the property to maintain and repair the 

property pursuant to Deer Run’s Governing Documents.

18. On November 11, 2012, Belkova received a Chapter 7 discharge.

19. On November 4, 2013, Belkova filed for relief under Chapter 12 relief in the Middle 

District of Florida, initiating case number 13-13644-CCJ in the Orlando Division and again staying 

Deer Run from proceeding in state court. On December 20, 2013, the case was transferred to the 

Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, and was assigned case number 13-07570-JAF 

(the “Second Bankruptcy Case”). A true copy of the Second Bankruptcy Case Docket is attached 

hereto as Exhibit “C.”

20. During the pendency of the Second Bankruptcy Case, Deer Run sought relief from 

the automatic stay with respect to the Subject Property. On December 15, 2015 the Court entered 

an “Agreed Order Granting Deer Run Property Owners’ Association, Inc’s Motion for Relief From 

the Automatic Stay” (Second Bankruptcy Case Doc. #244; the “Stay Relief Order”). A true copy 

of the Stay Relief Order is attached hereto as Exhibit “D.”

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 4 of 17
21. The Stay Relief Order provided that stay relief was granted to proceed with the 

2007 Lawsuit as well as to permit Deer Run Association “to proceed in all respects in regard to 

any post-petition assessments claimed to be owed to Deer Run by the Debtor [Belkova] which the 

parties agree are not dischargeable.” 

22. The Stay Relief Order further provided that Deer Run “stipulates that the prepetition assessments are dischargeable, will not oppose the Debtor’s [Belkova’s] Motion to Value 

in regard to such pre-petition assessments and a separate order shall be entered as to such Motion.” 

23. Belkova sought multiple times to vacate or reconsider the Stay Relief Order, as well 

as to re-impose the stay as against Deer Run Association during the Second Bankruptcy Case. The 

Bankruptcy Court denied every such effort. (See Second Bankruptcy Docket at Doc. #253, 259, 

264, and 267)

24. On March 16, 2016, Belkova filed a Notice of Appeal (Second Bankruptcy Case 

Doc. #272), initiating District Court appeal of the Stay Relief Order as well as the corresponding 

Orders Denying reconsideration of the Stay Relief Order. 

25. On November 16, 2016, the District Court dismissed Belkova appellate case. A 

true copy of the Order of Dismissal is attached hereto as Exhibit “E.”

26. On January 27, 2017, during the pendency of the Second Bankruptcy Case, the 

Bankruptcy Court entered an “Order Granting Belkova’s Motion to Determine Secured Status of 

Deer Run Property Owners’ Association and Strip Lien Effective Upon Discharge” (Second 

Bankruptcy Case Doc #358; the “Valuation Order”), effectively stripping at discharge Deer Run’s 

secured claim and lien for moneys owed pre-petition in the Second Bankruptcy Case. (See Second 

Bankruptcy Docket at Doc. #502).

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 5 of 17
27. After receiving her Discharge, Belkova filed and Amended Schedule C under 

penalty of perjury, claiming the Subject Property to be “Florida Homestead Exemption on 

beneficial interest I own as joint tenant with right of survivorship in my homestead property,” 

which is inconsistent with the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser records, and her claim in 

the State Court Foreclosure that she is a commercial tenant of the Subject Property pursuant to a 

commercial lease. A true copy of Belkova’s Amended Schedule “C” in the Second Bankruptcy 

Case and her Answer filed in the State Court Foreclosure are attached hereto as Exhibits “F” and 

“G,” respectively.

28. Pursuant to the relief afforded Deer Run in the Stay Relief Order, on February 8, 

2017, Deer Run filed a foreclosure action relative to the Subject Property in the County Court of 

the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in a case styled Deer Run Property 

Owners’ Association, Inc. v. Lilia Belkova As Successor Trustee of the Land Trust Agreement No: 

072003 Dated 2/9/04, Unknown Tenant One and Unknown Tenant Two, Case No. 2017CC001472 

(the “Deer Run Foreclosure Action”). A copy of the State Court docket of the Deer Run 

Foreclosure Action is attached hereto as Exhibit “H.”

29. Belkova vexatiously litigated in opposition to the Deer Run Foreclosure Action for 

over four (4) years, which final culminated in the entry of a Final Judgment of Foreclosure on 

September 13, 2021. 

30. The state court’s findings regarding Belkova’s bad faith litigation are set forth in 

the state court’s “Order Denying Defendant Lilia Belkova’s Verified Emergency Motion to 

Continue Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Set for April 29, 2021” dated June 

9, 2021; “Order Granting Plaintiff Deer Run Property Owners Association, Inc.’s Amended 

Motion for Summary Judgment” dated June 9, 2021; and “Order Awarding Plaintiff Attorney’s 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 6 of 17
Fees and Costs” dated September 13, 2021. Copies of these state court orders are attached hereto 

as Exhibits “I”, “J”, and “K”, respectively. 

31. During the pendency of the Deer Run Foreclosure Action and the Second 

Bankruptcy Case, the public records also reflect that on July 13, 2019, Belkova, as trustee of the 

Land Trust No. 072003 dated 2/9/04, executed a mortgage loan with an entity named Enterprise 

Funding Solutions LLC, in the amount of $95,000.00 and secured by the Subject Property (the 

“Enterprise Funding Mortgage”). A copy of the Enterprise Funding Mortgage is attached hereto 

as Exhibit “L.”

32. This Enterprise Funding Mortgage was procured while Belkova’s Second 

Bankruptcy Case remained pending, yet the case docket reflects no Order approving or 

allowing the transaction in violation of §362(d)(4). Belkova obtained the Enterprise Funding 

Mortgage while Belkova sought to obtain a hardship discharge in the context of the Second 

Bankruptcy Case and also while the Belkova was actively defending against a Motion for Stay 

Relief filed by PNC Bank, another creditor with secured interest in the Subject Property.

33. Moreover, despite her claim she has an interest in the Subject Property, the Debtor 

in this case did not execute the Enterprise Funding Mortgage.

34. On May 7, 2020, notwithstanding the pending Second Bankruptcy Case still 

proceeding, Belkova filed another petition for relief under Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code in 

the Southern District of Florida, initiating case number 20-15112-MAM (the “Third Bankruptcy 

Filing”). Belkova filed a Suggestion of Bankruptcy in the Deer Run Foreclosure Action, 

referencing this Third Bankruptcy Filing just prior to scheduled hearings on May 11, 2020, which 

prompted the State Court to defer ruling on motions set for hearing until further order by the 

Bankruptcy Court (See State Court Docket at Exhibit H). 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 7 of 17
35. The Chapter 12 Trustee in the Third Bankruptcy Case (who is also the Chapter 12 

Trustee in this case) moved for dismissal of the Third Bankruptcy Case, largely on the basis that 

Belkova filed the Third Bankruptcy Case while the Second Bankruptcy Case remained pending 

without entry of a discharge. Deer Run joined the Trustee in requesting dismissal of the Third 

Bankruptcy Case, but also requested dismissal with prejudice. 

36. On June 22, 2020, this Court entered an Order dismissing the Third Bankruptcy 

Case without prejudice (Third Bankruptcy Case Doc. #37). A copy of the Third Bankruptcy Case 

docket is attached hereto as Exhibit “M” and a copy of the “Order Granting Trustee’s Motion To 

Dismiss Bankruptcy Case Without Prejudice” is attached hereto as Exhibit “N.”

37. On June 3, 2020, also during the pendency of the Third Bankruptcy Case, Belkova 

received a Chapter 12 discharge in the Second Bankruptcy Case. 

38. Upon dismissal of the Third Bankruptcy Case, Deer Run sought again to proceed 

with the Deer Run Foreclosure Action, however, on June 25, 2020, Belkova filed another of the 

multiple notices of unavailability she filed as part of her overall scheme to delay the Deer Run 

Foreclosure Action (See Exhibit “H”). 

39. On July 15, 2020, the State Court entered an Order Granting Plaintiff’s [Deer Run] 

Motion for Status Conference, striking Belkova’s fourth Notice of Unavailability and deeming it 

a nullity. Additionally, Deer Run’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment of Foreclosure and 

Defendant’s Emergency Motion For Determination of Total Amount Claimed And Permission To 

Post The Money Into The Registry Of The Court And For Extension Of Time To File Amended 

Affirmative Defenses were rescheduled for hearing to July 27, 2020.

40. However, by this time, Belkova was able to file a new Chapter 12 case because her 

2013 case had concluded. So, on July 23, 2020, during the time period Belkova asserted to the 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 8 of 17
state court she was unavailable, Belkova filed another voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 

12 of the Bankruptcy Code, initiating Case No: 3:20-bk-02204-RCT (the “Fourth Bankruptcy 

Case”). A true copy of the Fourth Bankruptcy Court docket is attached hereto as Exhibit “O.”

41. The filing of the Fourth Bankruptcy Case again stayed the Deer Run Foreclosure 

Action yet again, cancelling the July 27, 2020 hearing on Deer Run Association’s Motion for Final 

Summary Judgment of Foreclosure.

42. In connection with the Fourth Bankruptcy Case, Belkova filed initial Schedules in 

on August 14, 2020 wherein she claimed an interest in Subject Property as a beneficiary of the 

Trust that owns the Subject Property and referenced Deer Run as a secured creditor. A true copy 

of Belkova’s Schedule A is attached hereto as Exhibit “P.”

43. On November 2, 2021, Deer Run filed its Motion for Order of Dismissal with 

Extended Prejudice Period or Prospective Stay Relief. (See Fourth Bankruptcy Case, Doc. #31). 

PNC and Fidelity joined in Deer Run’s Motion.

44. On November 19, 2021 at 11:00 am, the Honorable Roberta A. Colton, after hearing 

argument from Deer Run, PNC, Fidelity and Belkova, entered an “Order Granting Motion By 

Deer Run Property Owners’ Association, Inc. For Order of Dismissal And Imposing A Bar To 

Future Filings For A Period of One Year” dated November 19, 2021 and “Order Granting Motion 

for Prospective Stay Relief from the Automatic Stay” dated November 23, 2020 (the “Fourth 

Bankruptcy Orders”). True copies of the Fourth Bankruptcy Orders are attached hereto as Exhibit 

“Q” and “R,” respectively.

45. On December 17, 2020, Belkova filed a Notice of Appeal of the Deer Run Fourth 

Bankruptcy Orders directly to the Middle District Court. A true copy of Belkova’s Notice of 

Appeal is attached hereto as Exhibit “S”.

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 9 of 17
46. As of September 17, 2021, Belkova’s appeal of the Fourth Bankruptcy Orders has 

been pending 274 days, but she has yet to file her brief because, for one reason or another, she has 

requested multiple extensions from the Middle District Court.

47. Of interest to this Court, the most recent extension was requested by the Debtor’s 

former counsel, Mark Roher, Esq., who filed a Notice of Appearance on behalf of Belkova on 

August 31, 2021, the day Belkova’s initial brief was due.

48. On the same day, Mr. Roher requested an additional extension to file Belkova’s 

Initial Consolidated Brief, which the Court granted on Friday, September 3, 2021. 

49. After securing an extension for Belkova, on the next business day, Tuesday, 

September 7, 2021, Mr. Roher moved to withdraw from representing Belkova, which was denied 

without prejudice. The Middle District Court’s Orders granting Belkova an extension to file her 

initial brief until September 30, 2021, and subsequent Orders that have been since been entered in 

response to Mr. Roher’s Motion to Withdraw are attached hereto as Exhibits “T-1” through “T4”.

LEGAL ARGUMENT

I. Dismissal for Bad Faith and Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 1208(c)

50. Eleventh Circuit law provides that the totality of the circumstances should be 

analyzed in determining whether a case should be dismissed for bad faith. In re Phoenix Picadilly, 

849 F.2d 1393 (11th Cir. 1988), describing totality of circumstances analysis for bad faith in the 

context of Chapter 11; In re Kitchens, 702 F.2d 885 (11th Circ. 1983), contemplating bad faith in 

the context of a Chapter 13 proceeding. 

51. Under Phoenix Picadilly, analysis of the following factors is illustrative of a bad 

faith filing: “(i) The Debtor has only one asset, the Property, in which it does not hold legal title; 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 10 of 17
(ii) the Debtor has few unsecured creditors whose claims are small in relation to the claims of 

Secured Creditors; (iii) the Debtor has few employees; (iv) the Property is the subject of a 

foreclosure action as a result of arrearages on the debt; (v) the Debtor’s financial problems involve 

essentially a dispute between the Debtor and Secured Creditors which can be resolved in the 

pending State Court Action; and (vi) the Timing of the Debtor’s filing evidences an intent to delay 

or frustrate the legitimate efforts of the Debtor’s secured creditors to enforce their rights.” In re 

Phoenix Picadilly, Lt., 849 F.2d 1393 (11th Cir. 1988); see also In re Calzadilla 151 B.R. 622 (Bkr. 

So. Dist. Fla., 1993) (J. Weaver, J. Cristol, and J. Mark, en banc) applying Phoenix Picadilly 

doctrine in a Chapter 13 context.

52. The In re Kitchens decision also enumerates a list of non-exclusive factors for such 

analysis: “(1) amounts of debtor’s income from all sources; (2) living expenses of the debtor and 

his independents; (3) amount of attorneys fees; (4) probable or expected duration of the debtor’s 

Chapter 13 plan; (5) motivations of the debtor and his sincerity in seeking relief under provisions 

of Chapter 13; (6) debtor’s degree of effort; (7) debtor’s ability to earn and likelihood of fluctuation 

in his earnings; (8) special circumstances such as inordinate medical expense; (9) frequency with 

which the debtor has sought relief under the Bankruptcy Reform Act and its predecessors; (10) 

circumstances under which the debtor has contracted his debts and his demonstrated bona fides, 

or lack of same, in dealings with his creditors; and (11) burden which the plan’s administration 

would place on the Trustee.” In re Kitchens, 702 F.2d 885 (11th Cir. 1983); 11 U.S.C. §1325(a)(3).

53. The totality of circumstances analysis should be applied in evaluating 

circumstances of bad faith in all chapters including Chapter 12, as the “Supreme Court has made 

it clear bad faith is pertinent in all Chapters of the Bankruptcy Code, regardless of whether a 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 11 of 17
provision contains an explicit good-faith filing requirement.” In re Piazza, 719 F.3d 1253 at 1265 

(11th Circ. 2013), citing Marrama v. Citizens Bank, 549 U.S. 365 (2007). 

54. In the case at bar, the following supports a finding that this case was filed bad faith 

warranting dismissal:

a. The Debtor invoked the jurisdiction of this Court even though she is a 

Russian Citizen, presently resides in Russia, and offered no proof that she has ever 

resided within the jurisdiction of this Court, including at the Subject Property, yet 

claims to operate the Subject Property as a “family farm;”

b. The Debtor failed to sign her Chapter 12 Petition;

c. The Debtor filed her Chapter 12 Petition without accompanying her petition 

with basic mandatory filings, including a Summary of Assets and Liabilities, 

Schedules A-J, Schedule of Financial Affairs, Declaration Concerning Debtors 

Schedules, or Payment Advices;

d. The Debtor filed her Chapter 12 Petition on the same day as Deer Run’s 

state court evidentiary hearing on the amount of attorneys’ fee and costs which was 

the only remaining judicial labor in that case necessary to enter a Final 

Judgment of Foreclosure in favor of Deer Run and to set a judicial sale of the 

Subject Property;

e. The Debtor never has attempted to assert an interest in the Subject Property 

in Deer Run’s State Court Foreclosure and her claim to have an interest in the 

Subject Property now is contrary to the terms of the confirmed Chapter 12 Plan in 

the Second Bankruptcy Case filed by her daughter.

f. The evidence before the Court illustrates the Debtor is working in concert 

with her daughter to delay, hinder or defraud Deer Run, including to delay the 

forced sale of the Subject Property so that Deer Run may attempt to recover its 

outstanding assessments in related charges secured by its claim of lien against the 

Subject Property;

55. There has also been a recent attempt to transfer the Subject Property by Belkova to 

“Your Florida Realty Services, LLC, as Successor Trustee of the Land Trust Agreement No. 

072003 dated 2/9/04. A true copy of the “Trustee’s Deed” recorded on July 2, 2021 in Official 

Record Book 32652, Page 413 of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida for nominal 

consideration is attached hereto as Exhibit “U”.

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 12 of 17
56. According the Florida Department of State, Division of Corporation’s website, 

Your Florida Realty Services, LLC is a Florida limited liability company organized on June 6, 

2021 and filed on June 10, 2021 by Belkova with the Subject Property’s address as the principal 

place of business of this newly filed entity. A true copy of the Articles of Organization filed with 

Secretary of State June 10, 2021 is attached hereto as Exhibit “V”.

57. Based on the foregoing, nearly all factors described in the Phoenix Picadilly and

Kitchens analyses weigh in support of bad faith.

58. The factual history of the Debtor’s daughter’s actions prior to this case are also 

relevant. The Debtor’s daughter, Belkova, through multiple bankruptcy filings, delayed and 

hindered Deer Run’s State Court Foreclosure for over 4 1⁄2 years, and there seems to be no end in 

sight, as Belkova has made clear she intends to appeal the entry of the Final Judgment of 

Foreclosure and the Order Awarding Plaintiff Fees and Costs. 

59. 11 U.S.C. §349(a) provides that dismissal of a case is without prejudice “unless the 

court, for cause, orders otherwise.” Due to the egregious historical record and facts of this instant 

case, Deer Run respectfully requests that this Court dismiss this case and find cause for dismissal 

with a prejudice period of two years.

II. Multiple Prior Bankruptcy Filings and 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(4)

60. 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(4) provides that the automatic stay can be terminated upon a 

finding that a debtor’s filing of a petition was part of a scheme to delay, hinder, or defraud creditors 

that involved multiple bankruptcy filings affecting real property or in which an interest in such 

property was transferred without secured creditor or court approval. 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 13 of 17
61. An order entered terminating the automatic stay on such a finding can be recorded 

in the public records and shall have a binding effect prospectively for two years, prohibiting future 

bankruptcy filings from affecting the real property. 11 U.S.C. 362 §362(d)(4).

62. The instant proceeding represents the fifth bankruptcy filing to impact Deer Run 

and its secured interest in the Subject Property. 

63. Each bankruptcy filing was strategically timed to delay and hinder or attempt to 

delay and hinder Deer Run in exercising its state court rights against the Subject Property.

64. Moreover, the Debtor’s daughter has claimed to be the legal and equitable owner 

of the Subject Property in multiple court proceedings. Yet on the morning of the day when Deer 

Run had a scheduled hearing to obtain an award of attorneys’ fees and costs and final judgment of 

foreclosure, the Debtor filed this case, listing all of the secured creditors of the Subject Property 

as her creditors, even though none of these creditors have ever looked to the Debtor to satisfy 

their respective indebtedness secured by the Subject Property.

65. This begs the question – what was the purpose of filing this Chapter 12 case in the 

first place?

66. The Debtor’s daughter’s bad faith actions in state court, this Court, and the Middle 

District Court to stop Deer Runs State Court Foreclosure are well documented. Moreover, when 

all avenues to stop Deer Run’s State Court Foreclosure of the Subject Property were at end for 

Belkova, the Debtor picked up the proverbial baton to try and thwart Deer Run’s efforts to obtain 

a Final Judge of Foreclosure and judicial sale date of the Subject Property. 

67. Indeed, upon discovery of the properly recorded certified copy of Judge Colton’s 

Prospective Stay Relief Order in the public records, which Mr. Roher conceded was later the day 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 14 of 17
he filed this Chapter 12 case, the Debtor should have immediately voluntarily dismissed her 

deficiently filed Chapter 12 petition. 

68. Instead, the Debtor sought multiple extensions of time from the Court to file her 

schedules and other outstanding filings, as well as requested a later date to conduct the first meeting 

of creditors under Section 341 of the Code. 

69. Based on all of the foregoing, it is clear that the Debtor has participated in a scheme 

to delay, hinder, or defraud Deer Run and to attempt to prevent it from proceeding in state court 

against the Subject Property. Therefore, proper cause exists for this Court to enter an Order 

granting Deer Run prospective stay relief to run a two-year period from the date of the Court’s 

Order. 

III. Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code

70. This Court has the inherent power to impose sanctions on the Debtor upon a finding 

of a bad faith filing of a petition for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code. See, e.g., In 

re Casavalencia, 389 B.R. 292 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2008) (citing Chambers v. NASCO, 501 U.S. 32. 

111 S. Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed. 27 (1991); In re Mroz, 65 F. 3d 1567 (11th Cir. 1995)). 

71. The Debtor and her daughter, Belkova, have utilized the automatic stay and 

protections of the Bankruptcy Code as a sword rather than a shield. The number and timing of 

bankruptcy filings by the Debtor’s daughter have been found to be for the purpose of delaying, 

hindering, and defrauding Deer Run by Judge Colton in the Middle District, and by the Honorable 

Judge Sarah L. Shullman of the County Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Court in and for Palm Beach 

County. 

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 15 of 17
72. When her daughter was legally prohibited from filing another bankruptcy petition 

to stop Deer Run’s State Court Foreclosure because of Judge Colton’s Orders, she enlisted the aid 

of her mother, the Debtor in this case.

73. Accordingly, cause exists for this Court to enter an Order granting Deer Run 

prospective stay relief to run a two-year period from the date of the Court’s Order. 

WHEREFORE, Creditor Deer Run Property Owners’ Association, Inc. respectfully 

requests this Court grant this Motion and enter an Order Dismissing the Case with a Prejudice 

Period of two (2) years or, in the alternative, Grant Deer Run Prospective In Rem Relief from the 

Automatic Stay with a two (2) year bar against future filings pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 362(d)(4), so 

that Deer Run may pursue any and all remedies and rights it may have with respect to the Subject 

Property in state court, including foreclosure and injunctive relief, and enter any such other and 

further relief as the Court deems appropriate.

Dated this 17th day of September 2021.

ROSENBAUM PLLC

Counsel for Secured Creditor Deer Run 

Property Owners’ Association, Inc.

250 S. Australian Avenue, 5th Floor

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

Telephone: (561) 653-2900

Email: sbraten@rosenbaumpllc.com

Email: lhenson@rosenbaumpllc.com

By: /s/ Steven R. Braten, Esq._______

Steven R. Braten, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 18074

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 16 of 17
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am admitted to the Bar of the United States District Court for 

the Southern District of Florida and I am in compliance with the additional qualifications to 

practice in this Court set forth in Local Rule 2090-1(A) and that true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Motion has been served electronically this 17th day of September 2021 through the 

Court’s CM/ECF system on all parties on the service list and by U.S. mail on the manual service 

list:

Notice will be electronically mailed to: 

Anisa Nazarova, Debtor

almatovalina@mail.ru (Per Doc. 36)

Michele A Cavallaro on behalf of Creditor Fidelity National Title Group 

michele.cavallaro@fnf.com, andrea.brodsky@fnf.com 

Heidi A Feinman on behalf of U.S. Trustee Office of the US Trustee 

Heidi.A.Feinman@usdoj.gov 

Robert C Furr 

danderson@furrcohen.com, rcf@trustesolutions.net 

Office of the US Trustee 

USTPRegion21.MM.ECF@usdoj.gov 

Hampton Peterson, Esq on behalf of Creditor Palm Beach County Tax Collector 

legalservices@PBCTax.com 

Via Mail

Anisa Nazarova 

d.10 kv.12 Matrosova Street 

Russian Federation, Barda 

Perm area, 618150,

By: /s/ Steven R. Braten, Esq._______

ATTORNEY

Case 21-17336-MAM Doc 38 Filed 09/17/21 Page 17 of 17