Bank of America, N.A. v. Dayo Bello

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Bank of America, N.A.. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam.

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[DO NOT PUBLISH]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