J — Second Amendment (Docket Entry No. 68) (average monthly expenses of $2,350). 33 . In applying University Medical Center, some courts suggest the decision established a two-prong test for the exception to apply. See In re Montgomery Ward, LLC, 292 B.R. 49, 57 (Bankr.D.Del.2003) (stating that University Medical Center good faith exception applied "where (1) the law on the issue is not settled, and (2) the defendant has persuasive legal authority indicating that his or her actions do not violate the stay”); cf. In re Mattera, 2007 WL 594908, at *7 (Bankr.D.N.J. Feb.21, 2007) ("Courts interpreting the exception are unclear about whether both persuasive legal authority and legal uncertainty are required, or whether just one suffices.”); In re Hawk, 314 B.R. 312, 318 (Bankr.D.N.J.2004) (<HOLDING>). Other courts, however, have not applied
recognizing the two lines of child custody cases but declining to resolve conflict holding that where a contractor relied on montgomery countys prior reasonable and debatable interpretation of the statutory phrase nonhabitable structures and constructed its building based on that interpretation and with a valid permit it would be inequitable for the county board of appeals to apply a changed interpretation to require removal of the buildings fourth floor holding that an arbitrators interpretation of the scope of the issue submitted to him is entitled to the same deference accorded his interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement recognizing that only the illinois supreme court could finally resolve the issue of implicit repeal explaining the state must resolve this conflict internally recognizing the twoprong interpretation of montgomery ward but neglecting to resolve issue because the creditors satisfied both prongs