non-debtor spouse] becomes one of the general unsecured creditors of the estate.’ “[In re Palmer;] 78 B.R. [402,] 406 [ (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.1987) ].” Hunter, 706 So.2d at 754. The former husband argues that any issue concerning the trial court’s authority to divide the parties’ property is moot because the former wife’s bankruptcy petition was dismissed after the entry of the divorce judgment and before the entry of the trial court’s December 10, 2010, order denying the former wife’s postjudgment motion. We disagree. “Violations of the automatic stay are void for all purposes. Their ineffectiveness is permanent, not temporary.” 40235 Washington St. Corp. v. Lusardi, 177 F.Supp.2d 1090, 1104 (S.D.Cal.2001). Accord LaBarge v. Vierkant (In re Vierkant), 240 B.R. 317, 325 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 1999) (<HOLDING>); Village Nurseries v. Gould (In re Baldwin
holding judgment in violation of automatic stay void holding that an action taken in violation of the automatic stay is void ab initio holding that a state court judgment that modifies a discharge in bankruptcy is void ab initio and the rookerfeldman doctrine would not bar federal court jurisdiction holding void ab initio ordinance proscribing punishment in excess of that authorized in charter recognizing that any action taken in violation of the automatic bankruptcy stay is void and without effect