Court Opinion

ID: 2670380
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-04-18 00:01:59.328781+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:40.706797
License: Public Domain

Case: 14-10062        Date Filed: 04/17/2014       Page: 1 of 2

                                                                      [DO NOT PUBLISH]

                  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                             FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                               ________________________

                                      No. 14-10062
                                  Non-Argument Calendar
                                ________________________

              D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-02519-WSD, 13-bkc-60610-JRS

DAYO BELLO,

                                                            Debtor,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

                                                             Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DAYO BELLO,

                                                            Defendant-Appellee.

                                ________________________

                       Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Georgia
                             ________________________

                                        (April 17, 2014)
              Case: 14-10062     Date Filed: 04/17/2014   Page: 2 of 2

Before PRYOR, MARTIN, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

      Bank of America, N.A. appeals the district court’s affirmance of the

bankruptcy court’s order voiding a wholly unsecured second priority lien on

residential property owned by a Chapter 7 debtor. The issue on appeal is whether a

Chapter 7 debtor is allowed to “strip off” a second priority lien on his home,

pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 506(a) and (d), when the first priority lien exceeds the

value of the property.

      We addressed recently this issue and concluded that a wholly unsecured

junior lien -- such as the one held here by Bank of America -- is voidable under

section 506(d). See McNeal v. GMAC Mortg., LLC (In re McNeal), 735 F.3d
1263 (11th Cir. 2012). Bank of America acknowledges that this panel is bound by

the Court’s decision in McNeal, but reserves the right to seek reconsideration of

the issue by the en banc Court. Cf. United States v. Smith, 122 F.3d 1355, 1359

(11th Cir. 1997) (“Under the prior panel precedent rule, we are bound by earlier

panel holdings . . . unless and until they are overruled en banc or by the Supreme

Court.”).

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2