The motion for relief from stay of Alexandria Talbot duly came before the court for hearing. Daniel Weber appeared for the debtor. James L. Johnston appeared on behalf of Alexandria Talbot.

        The parties twenty-year marriage ended in an Alaskan divorce in 1989. The debtor retained a valuable military pension and his former spouse received little or nothing. Alexandria was unrepresented in the divorce. The state court, acting upon the report of a special master, vacated the divorce decree's property and debt division including any retirement rights and benefits through an order dated October 10, 1991. Attempting a peremptory strike, Mr. Talbot filed a chapter 7 bankruptcy eight days later and now vigorously resists termination of the stay.

        The briefs filed by the parties are largely irrelevant. There has been no state court determination of property rights of the parties. There has been no discharge of the debtor. The bulk of the briefs' discussions are meaningless.

        This is a motion for relief from stay. It is not a dischargeability action. As noted in In re MacDonald, 755 F.2d 715, 717 (9th Cir. 1985):

It is appropriate for bankruptcy courts to avoid incursions into family law matters "out of consideration of court economy, judicial restraint, and deference to our state court brethren and their established expertise in such matters." (citations omitted)

        Similarly, the Sixth Circuit in In re White, 851 F.2d 170 (6th Cir. 1988) affirmed a decision of a bankruptcy court granting relief from stay to permit divorce proceedings to continue in state court so that the state court could determine the spouse's interest in marital assets. There the court noted at page 174: "We affirm the decision to lift the stay under the circumstances here because we are concerned that the Bankruptcy Code could otherwise be abused as a weapon in a marital dispute."

        A substantial number of courts have found relief from stay appropriate with regard to dissolution actions. Schulze v. Schulze, 15 B.R. 106, 109 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1981) (granting debtor's wife complete from the automatic stay in order to complete the state proceedings for divorce, child custody and property division); In re Howard, 27 B.R. 894, 895-896 (Bankr. W.D. Ky.     2 ABR 202  1983) (court granted relief from the automatic stay to debtor's ex-wife who alleged that property settlement was fraudulently induced); Matter of Palmer, 78 B.R. 402 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1987) (partial relief from stay granted to debtor's spouse to permit application for support arrearages and determination of property interests); In re Wilson, 85 B.R. 722 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1988) (debtor's ex-wife granted relief from stay to continue state court proceeding deciding equitable division of martial property).

        In two Alaskan cases relief from stay has been granted in domestic relations cases. In re Palmatier, 1 A.B.R. 140 (Bankr. D. Alaska 1990); In re Wood, 1 A.B.R. 198 (Bankr. D. Alaska 1990). Additionally, this court recommended abstention to the United States District Court in regard to a domestic relations matter in In re Hinchey, 1 A.B.R. 447 (Bankr. D. Alaska 1991). Despite objections from the bankruptcy trustee, this court's recommendation to abstain was adopted by the United States District Court. See Order filed September 5, 1991 in the United States District Court, entitled Ken Hinchey, Debtor, Francis L. Avezac, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. Joseph P. Palmier, Palmier & Stohr, Vida Hinchey and Clark E. Hinchey, bankruptcy adversary case no. 3-87-00136-001.

        There is no legitimate reason for denying relief from the stay to Alexandria Talbot. Therefore,

        IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for relief from stay of Alexandria Talbot is granted. The automatic stay of 11 U.S.C.     2 ABR 203  § 362 is terminated with regard to all issues in an action now pending in the Superior Court for the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District, entitled In the Matter of the Dissolution of the Marriage of Daniel W. Talbot and Alexandria Talbot, case no. 3AN-89-8350 Civil.

        Judgment shall be entered and docketed in accordance with this order.

        DATED: December 4, 1991.

BY THE COURT




DONALD MacDONALD IV
United States Bankruptcy Judge