Abonal v. U.S.A. Trustee (In re Jackson, Jr.)
- Summarized by Bryan Robinson , Law Offices of Bryan Robinson
- 10 years 2 months ago
- Citation:
- Abonal v. U.S.A. Trustee (In re Jackson, Jr.), 9th Cir. B.A.P, CC-14-1091-DKiTa ( November 3, 2014) [Not for Publication]
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- In an unpublished opinion, the 9th Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed the order of the bankruptcy court, sanctioning appellant, Moses Abonal, Moses F. Abonal and his business, Abonal Paralegal Services (collectively, “Mr. Abonal”), $11,000 for various violations under § 110 as a bankruptcy petition preparer.
- Procedural context:
- The debtors, Earl and Cheryl Jackson, filed their chapter 7 petition on August 2, 2013. They converted their case to chapter 13 on November 1, 2013, but later voluntarily dismissed their case on December 4, 2013. On December 24, 2013, the UST filed its Motion against Mr. Abonal. The UST sought a total of $16,500 in fines against him for eleven violations of § 110. Consistent with its ruling at the hearing On February 13, 2014, the bankruptcy court entered both its factual findings and legal conclusions (“findings and conclusions”) and a separate order on February 24, 2014. Mr. Abonal timely appealed.
- Facts:
- Ms. Prager is an attorney licensed to practice in California. Mr. Abonal is not an attorney licensed to practice in California. He operates a business called Abonal Paralegal Services, located in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Abonal listed his business address as the same one Ms. Prager indicated was her office address (i.e., Santa Monica Boulevard). Prepetition, the debtors gave Mr. Abonal a total of $1,806, which included the $306 court filing fee. The debtors paid Mr. Abonal $800 cash on June 22, 2013, and then directly deposited $706 and $300 into his personal bank account on July 2, 2013, and July 11, 2013, respectively. When he filed their bankruptcy documents, Mr. Abonal used his own credit card to pay the debtors’ filing fee. Mr. Abonal prepared the debtors’ bankruptcy documents, including the petition, schedules, amended schedules, statement of financial affairs (“SOFA”), amended SOFA and the chapter 13 plan. He neither signed nor provided his social security number or address on the petition, the certificate of non-attorney bankruptcy petition preparer attached to the notice of available chapters (“chapter notice”),the declaration concerning debtor’s schedules (“schedules declaration”), the SOFA or the amended SOFA. Ms. Prager signed all of these documents, except the SOFA, amended SOFA and schedules declaration. She also signed the electronic filing declaration and the verification of the creditor mailing list. Mr. Abonal did not file a declaration of non-attorney bankruptcy petition preparer (Official Form 19)(“bankruptcy petition preparer declaration”). He also did not file the disclosure of compensation of a bankruptcy petition preparer (Official Form 280)(“bankruptcy petition preparer fee disclosure”). The SOFA, amended SOFA, the disclosure of compensation of attorney for debtor (“attorney fee disclosure”) and the declaration re: limited scope of appearance pursuant to LBR 2090-1 (“attorney appearance declaration”) indicated that the debtors paid Ms. Prager $1,500. The attorney fee disclosure and the attorney appearance declaration both indicated that Ms. Prager was the attorney for the debtors. Although she was named as their attorney, Ms. Prager neither personally met the debtors nor spoke with them. She also did not appear on their behalf at the initial and continued § 341(a) meetings. Instead, Mr. Abonal met with the debtors, advising them to file for bankruptcy and explaining the various bankruptcy chapters available to them. He informed the debtors that their debts would be discharged in chapter 7, and later, that they should convert their chapter 7 case to chapter 13. Mr. Abonal also arranged to have attorneys make special appearances on the debtors’ behalf at the initial and continued § 341(a) meetings. Notably, these two attorneys did not speak with Ms. Prager about the § 341(a) meetings; they only spoke with Mr. Abonal. On December 24, 2013, the UST filed its Motion against Mr. Abonal for eleven violations of § 110.
- Judge(s):
- DUNN, KIRSCHER AND TAYLOR, Bankruptcy 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!
