Edwards v. Edmondson (In re Edwards)
- Citation:
- No. 10-605 (8th Cir. B.A.P., April 12, 2011)
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- Issues and evidence not submitted to the bankruptcy court should only rarely be considered by a court at the appellate stage, and those circumstances did not apply where the appellant merely raised unsubstantiated claims of conspiracy, fraud, and malpractice. Under Missouri law, post-judgment interest is allowed, except during pendency of an appeal by the judgment creditor, or where the judgment is unliquidated. In the former case, the delay is caused by the creditor. In the latter case, the judgment debtor cannot ascertain the amount owed, until the claim is liquidated. Here, it was the debtors, not the creditor, who were the appellants; and, because the court had ordered the debtors to pay a $50 per day penalty, they could easily calculate the amount owed at any time. Additionally, the bankruptcy court did not error in allowing post-petition interest on the judgment, which it properly reduced from the statutory state post-judgment interest rate to the bankruptcy court's "local rule rate" for post-petition interest on an over-secured claim in a chapter 13 case.
- Procedural context:
- Affirmed. The debtor appealed the allowance of a proof of claim filed by a secured claimant.
- Facts:
- The debtors were ordered to remove a pond and restore a stream bed by a certain date, or pay a $50 per day penalty. After seven years of litigation and appeals, a judgment was entered in favor of the creditors for $63,950. Less than three months later, the debtors filed their petition for relief under chapter 13. They objected to the creditor's amended proof of claim, but offered no rebuttal evidence or opposing testimony.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
