Now Updating
Yerian v. Webber (In re: Verian)

Summarizing by Kathleen DiSanto

IN RE: SMALIS

Case Type:
Consumer
Case Status:
Affirmed
Citation:
No. 17-1880 (3rd Circuit, Oct 09,2018) Not Published
Tag(s):
Ruling:
Affirmed District Court affirmation of Bankruptcy Court decision which denied motion to vacate 2006 consent order and granted motion to dismiss and motion for sanctions.
Procedural context:
Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Facts:
Ernest Smalis sough to vacate a consent order entered 2006 in an adversary proceeding related to his ex-wife's bankruptcy. Smalis had initiated the adversary proceeding to attempt to re-litigate a closed foreclosure action concerning property that had been owned by Smalis and his ex-wife. The consent order resolved the adversary proceeding and released all claims. Nine years after entry of the consent order, Smalis filed a new adversary complaint seeking to unwind the consent order. The defendant banks moved to dismiss and for sanctions. The bankruptcy court dismissed the new adversary proceeding and granted the motion for sanctions against Smalis. The bankruptcy court found in part, the motion to vacate, filed ten years after entry of the Consent Order, did not comply with the one-year limitations period of Rules 60(b)(1)-(3), and was unreasonably belated for purposes of Rules 60(b)(5)-(6).
Judge(s):
GREENAWAY, JR., BIBAS and ROTH

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

2925 in the system

2848 Summarized

18 Being Processed