Gem Plumbing Heating Co., Inc. v. Lindenfeld

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Gem Plumbing Heating Co., Inc. v. Lindenfeld

604 A.2d 346, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 243, 1992 WL 60026

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMarch 26, 1992

DocketNo. 91-352-Appeal

StatusPublished

This text of 604 A.2d 346 (Gem Plumbing Heating Co., Inc. v. Lindenfeld) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gem Plumbing Heating Co., Inc. v. Lindenfeld, 604 A.2d 346, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 243, 1992 WL 60026 (R.I. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This matter was before a panel of this court pursuant to an order issued to the defendants to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily resolved.

After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after hearing their counsel in oral argument, it is the conclusion of the court that cause has not been shown. The automatic stay of bankruptcy is not applicable to the individual defendants in this action since they were not personally involved in the bankruptcy proceedings. In any event, the defendant had the obligation to answer the case and raise the issue of bankruptcy on the record. The defendants failed to enter their appearance or file an answer in this matter and judgment was properly entered against them.

Therefore the defendants’ appeal is denied and dismissed, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed and the case is remanded to the Superior Court.

FAY, C.J., and MURRAY, J., did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

This matter was before a panel of this court pursuant to an order issued to the defendants to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily resolved.

After reviewing the memoranda submitted by the parties and after hearing their counsel in oral argument, it is the conclusion of the court that cause has not been shown. The automatic stay of bankruptcy is not applicable to the individual defendants in this action since they were not personally involved in the bankruptcy proceedings. In any event, the defendant had the obligation to answer the case and raise the issue of bankruptcy on the record. The defendants failed to enter their appearance or file an answer in this matter and judgment was properly entered against them.

Therefore the defendants’ appeal is denied and dismissed, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed and the case is remanded to the Superior Court.

FAY, C.J., and MURRAY, J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

604 A.2d 346, 1992 R.I. LEXIS 243, 1992 WL 60026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gem-plumbing-heating-co-inc-v-lindenfeld-ri-1992.