In Re Austin

46 B.R. 358, 12 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 197, 1985 Bankr. LEXIS 6722, 12 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 871
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin
DecidedFebruary 12, 1985
Docket19-21261
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 46 B.R. 358 (In Re Austin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Austin, 46 B.R. 358, 12 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 197, 1985 Bankr. LEXIS 6722, 12 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 871 (Wis. 1985).

Opinion

DECISION AND ORDER

D.E. IHLENFELDT, Bankruptcy Judge.

The attorney for Warren Allynn Austin and Jean Marie Austin has filed a motion asking the court to allow a bankruptcy *359 petition filed by Warren to be amended so as to include Jean Marie in the petition, thereby making it a joint petition as authorized by § 302 of the Bankruptcy Code.

A petition under chapter 7 of the Code was filed on September 24, 1984, together with a “Summary Information Sheet” and a “matrix.” The latter two required documents are intended to facilitate handling of the case by the clerical staff of the court. As its name implies, the Summary Information Sheet gives a capsule description of the case. The matrix or master list contains the names and addresses of creditors and other parties in interest in such fashion that they can be photostated directly onto gummed labels which in turn can be affixed to envelopes for mailing purposes. As is permitted by Bankruptcy Rule 1007(b) and (c), schedules of assets and liabilities and a statement of affairs were not filed with the petition.

The petition is captioned “Warren Allynn Austin SS: 397-52-3056.” At the bottom of the petition is the following declaration: “Individual: I, WARREN ALLYNN AUSTIN the petitioner named in the foregoing petition, certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.” Beneath the declaration are provided two lines for signatures. Warren’s signature appears on the top line. His name is typed in caps directly beneath the line. The bottom line contains Jean Marie’s signature, but it does not have her name typed in beneath the line.

The matrix contains Warren’s name and address but makes no reference to Jean Marie. Among the items of information which the debtor’s attorney is called upon to furnish in the Summary Information Sheet are the following:

KxGP0CaHmKaw

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

Related

In re Chilson
525 B.R. 130 (D. New Mexico, 2015)
ALDERWOODS GROUP, INC. v. Garcia
420 B.R. 609 (S.D. Florida, 2009)
Morrison v. Office of the U.S. Trustee (In Re Morrison)
375 B.R. 179 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 2007)
Ellett v. Goldberg (In Re Ellett)
317 B.R. 134 (E.D. California, 2004)
In Re Merlo
265 B.R. 502 (S.D. Florida, 2001)
Olson-Ioane v. Derham-Burk (In Re Olson)
253 B.R. 73 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
In Re Adair
212 B.R. 171 (N.D. Georgia, 1997)
In Re Clinton
166 B.R. 195 (N.D. Georgia, 1994)
In Re Friedman
184 B.R. 883 (N.D. New York, 1994)
In Re Anderson
159 B.R. 830 (N.D. Illinois, 1993)
In Re Sobin
99 B.R. 483 (M.D. Florida, 1989)
In Re Woodell
96 B.R. 614 (E.D. Virginia, 1988)
In Re Kirkus
97 B.R. 675 (N.D. Georgia, 1987)
In Re Lewis
51 B.R. 353 (E.D. New York, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 B.R. 358, 12 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 197, 1985 Bankr. LEXIS 6722, 12 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-austin-wieb-1985.