Hettler v. Stoebner
This text of 60 F. App'x 653 (Hettler v. Stoebner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Richard James Hettler (Hettler) appeals the district court’s1 order affirming seven bankruptcy court2 orders. Hettler lacks standing to appeal the bankruptcy court’s approval of the settlement and dismissal of proceedings in which Hettler was not an aggrieved person. See Russell v. Burris, 146 F.3d 563, 566 (8th Cir.1998) (standing requires injury, causation, and redressability). Hettler’s remaining claims are barred by collateral estoppel, res judicata, or because he asserts only baseless and conclusory allegations of fraud. We discern no clear error of fact or error of law in the bankruptcy court’s opinions. See In re Cedar Shore Resort, Inc., 235 F.3d 375, 379 (8th Cir.2000) (standard of review). Finally, Hettler’s contention that Judge Montgomery should be recused because she presided over cases involving parties to the underlying claims is specious. Finding no error, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
60 F. App'x 653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hettler-v-stoebner-ca8-2003.