Cruse v. Yates (In Re Yates)

429 B.R. 675, 2010 WL 2090334
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri
DecidedMay 20, 2010
Docket14-45126
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 429 B.R. 675 (Cruse v. Yates (In Re Yates)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cruse v. Yates (In Re Yates), 429 B.R. 675, 2010 WL 2090334 (Mo. 2010).

Opinion

AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

KATHY A. SURRATT-STATES, Bankruptcy Judge.

The matter before the Court is First Amended Trustee’s Complaint Objecting to Debtor’s Discharge, Response to First Amended Trustee’s Complaint Objecting to Debtor’s Discharge and Plaintiffs Trial Brief. The matter was set for trial on February 18, 2010 and Plaintiff Fredrich J. Cruse, Chapter 7 Trustee was the only party who appeared in person and by counsel. The matter was taken as submitted. Upon consideration of the record as a *678 whole, the Court issues the following FINDINGS OF FACT:

On July 12, 2007, Debtor Steve Lee Yates (hereinafter “Debtor”), filed a Bankruptcy Petition under Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code. Plaintiff Fredrich J. Cruse was the appointed Chapter 12 Trustee (hereinafter “Chapter 12 Trustee”). Debtor stated in his Chapter 12 Schedule B that he had 110 cows, 60 calves and certain equipment. 1 On May 14, 2008, the case was converted to a Chapter 7 ease. Plaintiff Fredrich J. Cruse was then appointed as the Chapter 7 Trustee (hereinafter “Chapter 7 Trustee”). On May 29, 2008, Debtor filed his Chapter 7 Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs (hereinafter “SOFA”) under penalty of perjury. In Debtor’s Chapter 7 Schedule B, Debtor claimed to only have six (6) cows, zero (0) calves remaining, the equipment and four (4) horses. 2

A Section 341 Meeting of Creditors was held on July 11, 2008 (hereinafter “July Meeting of Creditors”) at which Debtor was present and stated under oath that his Schedules and SOFA were complete and accurate. Debtor stated that his cattle count decreased because he sold some of the cows in and around February 28, 2008 for an undisclosed sum, sold 32 cows on March 8, 2008 for $18,000.00 and that he sold some calves in and around October 20, 2007 for an undisclosed sum. Debtor did have authority to sell cattle under the Chapter 12 plan, however, the proceeds were to be turned over to the Chapter 12 Trustee. Debtor stated that the $18,000.00 was instead placed in a safety deposit box at a Quincy, Illinois branch of Mercantile Bank. Debtor claims that the unsold cows and calves died during the winter and that he buried the carcasses. The Chapter 7 Trustee testified at trial that during the winter in the relevant part of Missouri, the earth freezes three (3) feet deep and therefore, either a backhoe or a front-end loader with hydraulics would be required to dig a sufficiently deep grave to bury cattle. Debtor stated in a Meeting of Creditors held on October 8, 2008 (hereinafter “October Meeting of Creditors”) that he used a scraper blade to dig the holes. Debtor did not have a backhoe or a front-end loader with hydraulics. Debtor has not revealed the location where he alleges the cattle were buried.

RCS Bank, a creditor in this case, claims a security interest in the equipment, cows and calves. A representative from RCS Bank stated at the October Meeting of Creditors that he saw a few cow carcasses, but no where near the number that Debtor suggests. At that same meeting, Debtor testified that the remaining six cows Debt- or had when the case was converted were sold by auction and the proceeds were turned over to RCS Bank.

As of May 2008, Debtor claimed to only have $600.00 left from the $18,000.00 in proceeds from the March 8, 2008 cattle sale. Debtor claims to have used the $17,400.00 to pay bills and to buy grain. Debtor has provided no proof of either payment of bills or purchase of grain. Debtor also claims to have sold the four horses for $150.00 each but provided no accounting for said funds. Debtor has also failed to account for the equipment.

In Debtor’s Chapter 12 case, Debtor alleged to have over 72 acres of corn and over 40 acres of beans. At the July Meeting of Creditors, Debtor claimed to have planted said corn and beans using left-over *679 seeds from seed boxes from prior years. Debtor’s Chapter 7 Schedules reflected no crops, neither corn nor bean. Debtor testified at the October Meeting of Creditors that he lost the crops because the cows ate them, Debtor could not afford fertilizer and there were too many weeds. The Chapter 7 Trustee testified at trial that Alexandra Carpenter, Agronomy Specialist employed by the University of Missouri— Extension, examined Debtor’s farm on behalf of the Chapter 7 Trustee and reported that there was no evidence that Debtor planted any crops in 2008 when Debtor claims to have planted them. Ms. Carpenter also reported to the Chapter 7 Trustee that there were crops from prior years that were never harvested. Debtor has not provided any record of harvest from prior years.

On March 17, 2008, the Court entered an Agreed Order directing the Debtor to provide the Chapter 12 Trustee and an attorney for RCS Bank with documentation of the sale of any cattle within ten days of any such sale and to provide the same with documentation of the sale of any cattle since Debtor’s bankruptcy filing in July 2007. 3 Debtor was also required to provide the Chapter 12 Trustee with monthly farm reports. Debtor did not provide any sale records for any of the cattle. Debtor provided the Chapter 12 Trustee with a few quarterly reports but did not provide any monthly farm reports. Debtor did state at the July Meeting of Creditors that when Debtor moved, anything in unmarked boxes was likely placed in a “burn pile” and Debtor cannot recall whether his farming records were placed in marked boxes. On January 14, 2010, the Chapter 7 Trustee served Plaintiffs First Request for Admissions Directed to Defendant Steve Lee Yates (“Request for Admissions”) to which Debtor never responded.

The Chapter 7 Trustee argues that Debtor is not entitled to a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2), (3), (4), (5) and (6). The Chapter 7 Trustee argues that Debtor has intentionally transferred, removed, destroyed, mutilated and/or concealed, or has permitted to be transferred, removed, destroyed, mutilated or concealed, the cattle and equipment with the intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud a creditor. The Chapter 7 Trustee also argues that Debtor has intentionally withheld or destroyed records of Debtor’s financial position as well as records concerning the cattle sales, cattle inventory and equipment. The Chapter 7 Trustee further argues that Debtor made false oaths at the July Meeting of Creditors, the October Meeting of Creditors, in the SOFA and in the Schedules and that Debtor has failed to adequately explain the loss and deficiency of assets. Finally, the Chapter 7 Trustee argues that Debtor has failed to obey the Court’s Order regarding turning over any funds to the Chapter 12 Trustee for proper distribution to creditors. The Chapter 7 Trustee also requests attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,000.00 in connection with this matter.

JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this proceeding under 28 U.S.C. §§ 151, 157, and

Related

Standiferd v. United States Trustee
641 F.3d 1209 (Tenth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
429 B.R. 675, 2010 WL 2090334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cruse-v-yates-in-re-yates-moeb-2010.