In Re Baumgartner

57 B.R. 513, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6887
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio
DecidedJanuary 16, 1986
Docket19-11044
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 57 B.R. 513 (In Re Baumgartner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Baumgartner, 57 B.R. 513, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6887 (Ohio 1986).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RICHARD L. SPEER, Bankruptcy Judge.

This cause comes before the Court upon the Motion To Dismiss and the Motion for Relief From Stay filed by Barbara Baum-gartner, the Court’s Order to Show Cause On Dismissal or Conversion, and the Hearing on the Debtor-In-Possession’s Disclosure Statement. With the exception of the Disclosure Statement, the Court conducted a Hearing on all of these matters. At the Hearing, the Court heard the evidence offered by the parties and the arguments made by counsel. The Court has reviewed the Motions, the evidence, and the arguments, as well as the entire record in this case. Based upon that review and in light of the disposition to be reached, the Court finds that it will be unnecessary to rule upon the Motion For Relief From Stay. Furthermore, for the following reasons the Court finds that the Debtor-In-Possession has failed to show cause why this case should not be dismissed, and that the Motion To Dismiss should be GRANTED.

*514 FACTS

The facts, as are relevant to the disposition of the matters presently before the Court, have been admitted by the Debtor-In-Possession in either the schedules filed with this Court or in his testimony. Accordingly, such facts are not considered subject to dispute.

The Debtor-In-Possession filed his individual voluntary Chapter 11 Petition with this Court on March 26, 1985. On April 2, 1985, this Court issued an Order which required the Debtor-In-Possession to file monthly reports with the Court and with the Estate Administrator. These reports were to be filed on or before the fifteen day of the month following the month being reported, commencing with the month following the filing of the Petition. The Order also requires that these reports substantially comply with the guidelines that have been established for such reports. The guidelines were provided to the Debt- or-In-Possession at the first meeting of creditors and set forth the following information which must be included in a report:

1. A reflection of the operation of the debtor-in-possession’s business over the preceding month. Included should be a disclosure of profits and losses, along with a separate listing of all gross sales, net profits, returns, allowances, deposits, withdrawals, expenses and all disbursements.
2. If the debtor-in-possession’s business includes real estate rentals, a monthly profit and loss statement as to the real estate, along with a listing of units available, current occupants, the rental rates of each unit, arrear-ages, and any major anticipated expenses relating to the property.
3. A listing of any post petition accounts payable, specifically noting those which are not being paid according to their terms. The list will include the name of the entity to whom the account is owed, reasons the expense/debt was incurred, and how much is owed. This disclosure should also include a separate aging of the accounts.
4. A listing of all accounts receivable, specifically stating from whom the account is owed, the reason it is owed and balance. This disclosure should also include a separate aging of the accounts.
5. Disclosure of all monies in the segregated tax accounts, along with a listing of each category of tax liability incurred during the month and the amount deposited toward each category of obligation.
6. A listing of all payments made to or on behalf of all employees, including, but not limited to withholding for taxes, retirement, pensions, health insurance, life insurance and garnishments.
7. A categorization and listing of all inventory, along with a statement of inventory sold or used during the month, and/or new inventory acquired.
8. A statement of any other assets of the estate which were sold during the month, the amount derived from the sale, and the manner in which the proceeds were handled.

A review of the record finds that during the year 1985, the Debtor-In-Possession filed the August report on September 27, 1985, the September report on December 30, 1985, the October report on November 18, 1985, and the November report on December 17, 1985. Although the Debtor-In-Possession filed on December 30, 1985, a Supplemental Financial Report, this report only elaborates on the Debtor-In-Possession’s related entities and does not directly augment the information in his personal reports. A further review of the reports finds that they include a listing of the Debtor-In-Possession’s gross income and gross expenses for any given month. The only other information found in the reports is an itemization of the Debtor-In-Possession’s expenses during the month.

A review of the Debtor-In-Possession’s schedules and the Supplemental Financial *515 Report finds that the Debtor-In-Possession is the whole or partial owner or partner in a variety of interlocking corporations and partnerships. The distinction between the property and obligations of these related entities and those of the Debtor-In-Possession are not made entirely clear in the record. During the pendency of this case, this Court has sought a clarification as to the relationships between these entities. As of the date of this Order, the Debtor-In-Possession has not explained, to the complete satisfaction of this Court, the details of his estate, the nature of his involvement with these other entities, or those assets owned by these entities which may be properly the subject of this Chapter 11. Any such information, when provided, has been tendered only after the Court has drawn such information from the Debtor-In-Possession.

In proceedings which were related to the prosecution of this Chapter 11 ease, the Debtor-In-Possession offered testimony which indicated that he had an investment margin account with Prudential Bache Securities. However, he also indicated that the account belonged to, and was in the name of, one of his related corporations. At some time subsequent to that disclosure, the Debtor-In-Possession revealed the fact that a second account existed, but that it was also in the name of a related corporation. At the Hearing conducted by this Court in the matters presently before it, the Debtor-In-Possession apprised the Court that there are, in fact, three such accounts, two of which are in the name of corporations and one in his own name. He further indicated that this third account was owned in his individual capacity and had an approximate value of Forty-five Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($45,000.00). A review of the Debtor-In-Possession’s B-2 schedule finds that this individual account is not reflected as an asset of the estate. The only place where the account appears is on the A-2 schedules, whereon it is listed as a secured obligation. The A-2 schedule indicates that the account has an approximate value of Four Hundred Fifty-five Thousand Two Hundred Forty-six and no/100 Dollars ($455,246.00), and that it secures a claim of approximately Three Hundred Fifty-eight Thousand Six Hundred Forty and no/100 Dollars ($358,-640.00). It also appears that the account may be subject to a second mortgage in favor of the Mid-American Bank & Trust Co. This account and any activity therein are not reflected in the Debtor-In-Possession’s monthly reports.

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

Related

Maximum Engineering v. Quinn Group CA2/5
California Court of Appeal, 2013
M & M Foods, Inc. v. Pacific American Fish Co.
196 Cal. App. 4th 554 (California Court of Appeal, 2011)
In Re Johnson
361 B.R. 903 (D. Montana, 2007)
United States v. Pedigo
329 B.R. 47 (S.D. Indiana, 2005)
Gribbins v. Farm Credit Services of Mid-America, ACA
43 F. App'x 861 (Sixth Circuit, 2002)
Cusano v. Klein
264 F.3d 936 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
In Re Park
246 B.R. 837 (E.D. Texas, 2000)
In Re Tornheim
239 B.R. 677 (E.D. New York, 1999)
In Re Matthews
154 B.R. 673 (W.D. Texas, 1993)
In Re Mohring
142 B.R. 389 (E.D. California, 1992)
In Re Smith
77 B.R. 496 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1987)
In Re Vallejo
77 B.R. 365 (D. Puerto Rico, 1987)
Matter of Young
76 B.R. 376 (D. Delaware, 1987)
In Re Jartran, Inc.
71 B.R. 938 (N.D. Illinois, 1987)
In Re McClure
69 B.R. 282 (N.D. Indiana, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 B.R. 513, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-baumgartner-ohnb-1986.