Now Updating

Summarizing by Amir Shachmurove

Neuman v. Krenz (In re Krenz)

9th Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Case No. AZ-15-1396-FLJu (Not for Publication)
Appellant's appeal related to the the minute entry order entered in 2014 was untimely. The bankruptcy court did not need to actually sign the minute entry order for it to be effective, so long as the order (1) states that it is an order (2) is mailed to counsel (3) is signed by the clerk who prepared it and (4) is entered on the docket sheet. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel also affirmed the bankruptcy court's ruling that there was no finding of bad faith or fraud, therefore, Appellant's objection to debtor's Chapter 13 discharge was denied.
Procedural context:
Tracy Neuman ("Neuman") appealed the bankruptcy court's minute entry order denying her opposition to Rodney Krenz ("Krenz") amendment to his schedule to include Neuman as a creditor. Additionally, Neuman appealed the bankruptcy court granting Krenz's motion for directed verdit denying Neuman's objection to Krenz's discharge.
Krenz") and Neuman married in 2006, collectively the "Parties". The Parties acquired various piece of real property during their marriage. Also, during the marriage, Krenz requested and Neuman agreed to incur a $100,000 home equity line of credit on a piece of property that was owned by Neuman as her sole and separate property. Krenz made $600 per month payments to Neuman. In 2010 Krenz filed for relief under Chapter 13, although Neuman was not listed as a creditor, Neuman was aware of Krenz's bankruptcy. Despite not being listed, Krenz continued to make $600 monthly payments to Neuman. Sometime in 2013 Krenz petitioned for divorce from Neuman. Krenz successfully obtained an order of protection against Neuman related to their marital residence based on Neuman's actions. Approximately 7 months prior to completion of his Chapter 13 plan payments, Krenz amended his scheduled to include Neuman as a creditor. Neuman contested the amendment; however, the bankruptcy court overruled Neuman's objection but allowed Neuman to file a claim. Several months later, Neuman wrote a subsequent letter to the bankruptcy court alleging that Krenz had not been forthright about this assets and taken many vacations. Neuman further asserted that Krenz secretly purchase a piece of real property in Tempe, Arizona and spent thousands of dollars renovating it. The bankruptcy court directed Krenz to provide evidence related to the allegations. At a subsequent hearing, Krenz affirmed that he provided his supporting documents to the Chapter 13 Trustee. The bankruptcy court decided to treat Neuman's claim(s) as an objection to discharge and set the matter for evidentiary hearing. At the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, the bankruptcy court determined that there was no bad faith or fraud. Therefore, Neuman's objection to discharge was denied.

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

3526 in the system

3409 Summarized

8 Being Processed