Now Updating
Ballard Spahr LLP v Official Committee of Equity Security Holders

Summarizing by Paris Gyparakis

Coastal Capital, LLC v. Savage

Summarizing by Bradley Pearce

Elizabeth Richert v. Kathleen White Murphy, et al

Case Type:
Business
Case Status:
Affirmed
Citation:
23-12840 (11th Circuit, Sep 26,2024) Not Published
Tag(s):
Ruling:
Bankruptcy court did not err in converting chapter 13 case to chapter 7 where debtor consistently failed to comply with bankruptcy court orders and demonstrated bad faith, nor did the court violate the debtor's constitutional rights by allowing claims of creditors. The Eleventh Circuit lacked jurisdiction to hear appeal granting a creditor an extension of time to respond to a claim objection, as the order was an interlocutory order.
Procedural context:
Debtor appealed a series of orders entered by the bankruptcy court which granted a creditor an extension of time to respond to a claim objection, involuntarily converted her chapter 13 case to chapter 7, and allowed the claims of certain creditors. The district court affirmed on appeal.
Facts:
Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code after an adverse judgment for damages and attorney's fees arising from the debtor's breach of fiduciary duty. was entered by an Illinois state court involving disputes with respect to the proceeds of a property and a trust in Illinois and the debtor's conduct as the trustee. The bankruptcy court directed the debtor to file a chapter 13 plan, make five monthly plan payments, provide required documents, file amended schedules, and appear for a Rule 2004 examination. The debtor failed to propose an appropriate chapter 13 plan and refused to provide information concerning her income or the source of the plan funding or respond to material questions during a Rule 2004 examination, and as a result, the bankruptcy court granted the creditors' request to convert the chapter 13 case to chapter 7. Additionally, the debtor objected to the proof of claim filed attorney who had represented the debtor in the Illinois state court action. The attorney failed to timely respond to the objection and belatedly sought an extension of time to respond to the objection, which was granted by the bankruptcy court.
Judge(s):
Newsom, Grant, and Anderson

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!

About us in numbers

3925 in the system

3801 Summarized

2 Being Processed