Schultze v. Chandler, Sr.

Summarized by Thomas Phinney , Felderstein Fitzgerald Willoughby Pascuzzi & Rios LLP
11 years 7 months ago

Citation:

9th Cir., August 1, 2014 (No. 12-15186)

Tag(s):

Ruling:

The Ninth Circuit amended its opinion dated July 18, 2014, at footnote 1, to state that it need not decide whether the bankruptcy court had the power to enter final judgment because the district court had conducted a de novo review, which under the recent Executive Benefits Case, 134 S. Ct. 2165 (2014), meant that plaintiffs "had received all of the review which Article III requires." The opinion holds that post-petition state law actions against court appointed professionals are core proceedings and therefore the bankruptcy court can enter final judgment in such matters.

Procedural context:

Appeal from district court, which affirmed bankruptcy court judgment.

Facts:

Creditors filed action against the attorneys for the unsecured creditors committee alleging that because they failed to insure that debtor's counsel filed UCC financing statements, creditors recovered less than they should have. Attorneys moved for summary judgment and court dismissed the action, holding that the attorneys for the committee did not owe a duty to individual creditors, but only to the committee as a whole. Creditors also challenged the right of the bankruptcy court to enter judgment.

Judge(s):

Stephen S. Trott, Sidney R. Thomas,and Mary H. Murguia, Circuit Judges

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!