Now Updating
In re Zachary Allen ; Tiara Donegan

Summarizing by Lars Fuller

Shamam v. Motzkin (In re Shamam)

9th Cir. BAP No. CC-14-1274 and No. CC-14-1300
BAP affirmed bankruptcy court in holding: 1) Bankruptcy court acted within it's discretion for entry of default and default judgment as to nondischargeability of debt; 2) the bankruptcy court did not abuse it's discretion in refusing to set aside the default; and 3) the pro se status of the judgment debtor was no excuse from complying with procedural rules of procedure that govern other litigants.
Procedural context:
Creditor brings an advesary proceeding against Debtor for nondischargeability of debt. Creditor obtains entry of default. Debtor moved to set aside the entry of default and, after multiple hearings, the bankruptcy court orders vacation of the default conditioned upon Debtor's payment--in monthly installments--of compensatory sanctions to the creditor. Debtor failed to fully pay the sanctions and the Creditor sought to strike the answer and reinstate the entry of default. Debtor did not oppose the motion to reinstate the entry of default and the bankruptcy court reinstated the entry of default. During hearings on creditor's motion for default judgment, Debtor moved to set aside the reinstatement of the entry of default. Bankruptcy court denied Debtor's motion to set aside the reinstatement of the entry of default and granted in part the default judgment.
Debtor obtained a business credit card in the name of a general partnership, obtained it by using the personal financial information from the judgment creditor and purportedly obtained the card without judgment creditor's knowledge, and used the credit card for non-business related transactions.
Taylor, Pappas, and Kirscher

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

3267 in the system

3146 Summarized

3 Being Processed