- Case Type:
- Case Status:
- 18-10469 (5th Circuit, Oct 23,2020) Published
- (1)-Bankruptcy Court had the equitable power under Section 105 (a) to correct any error it may have made in changing the date for the first creditors' meeting after the case was transferred from one district to another.. As a result, a creditor's discharge complaint was deemed timely because it complied with the deadlines set forth in the 341 notice issued by the court in the "transferred" case-even though the deadlines set forth in the notice of creditors' meeting in the "initial" case were not met. (2) The denial of the debtor's discharged was affirmed.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal from the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
- Debtor filed a Chapter 7 case in the E.D. of Texas. On 5/5/2014, the court issued a notice that scheduled the meeting of creditors' for 5/30/2014 and set 7/29/2014 as the deadline to object to the debtor's discharge. However, the meeting never occurred because the case was transferred to the N.D. of Texas by order of 5/13/2014. The N.D. of Texas set the creditors' meeting in the transferred case for 7/22/2014. That notice set the deadline for filing objections to discharge for 9/22/2014. The creditor who ultimately objected to the discharge obtained extensions for the filing of a discharge complaint. The discharge complaint was timely filed in the N.D. case. The debtor made false oaths regarding his income, his wife's income, two cars, a trust and critical operating dates of two entities with which he was associated, and the appeals court affirmed the denial of the debtor's discharge.
- Owen, Clement and Ho
3217 in the system
1 Being Processed