BFP v. Resolution Trust Corp.
BFP v. Resol. Tr. Corp., 511 U.S. 531 (1994)
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Decided
- 1994-05-23
- Docket
- 92-1370
What happened
After a California home sold at foreclosure for far below its claimed value, the owner filed bankruptcy and tried to undo the sale as a fraudulent transfer.
What the court decided
The Supreme Court held that the price received at a non-collusive foreclosure sale conducted under state law is "reasonably equivalent value" for bankruptcy purposes.
In the court's words
“the price in fact received at the foreclosure sale, so long as all the requirements of the State’s foreclosure law have been complied with”
Why it may matter to you
Timing matters: bankruptcy filed BEFORE the sale can stop it; after a proper sale, a low price alone usually cannot undo it.
Why it might not apply
If the sale did not follow state law, or was collusive, the answer can change.
Most useful when
- You hope bankruptcy can undo a completed foreclosure because the price was low
How to cite it
The full citation for the first time you mention it, a short form for later, and a sample sentence you can adapt.
BFP v. Resol. Tr. Corp., 511 U.S. 531 (1994)Short formBFP, 511 U.S. 531Draft — check it with free legal aid before you file or say it in court.
In BFP v. Resol. Tr. Corp., 511 U.S. 531 (1994), the court held that the price received at a non-collusive foreclosure sale that complied with state law is reasonably equivalent value under the Bankruptcy Code. Here, [say in one sentence what happened in your case]
Ask Techy about this case
Techy explains the case in plain words, why it may matter to you, its limits, and how to prepare. It only uses this case record.
Related cases
- Homeowner wonBinding
Till v. SCS Credit Corp.
541 U.S. 465 · Decided 2004
The Tills proposed a Chapter 13 plan paying their truck lender at 9.5% — the prime rate plus a risk adjustment. The lender wanted its 21% contract rate.
Read the case - Homeowner lostBinding
Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson
581 U.S. 224 · Decided 2017
In Ms. Johnson's Chapter 13 case, a debt buyer filed a claim for a debt that was obviously too old to collect. She sued under the FDCPA.
Read the case - Homeowner lostBinding
Nobelman v. American Savings Bank
508 U.S. 324 · Decided 1993
The Nobelmans owed more on the loan for their Dallas, Texas condominium than it was worth and asked to reduce the mortgage to the home's value in Chapter 13.
Read the case