In re Byers

519 B.R. 519, 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 4396, 2014 WL 5486433
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Byers. Read the opinion of the Court — 509 B.R. 577
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio·Decided October 10, 2014·No. No. 07-59297·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR PAUPER STATUS

C. KATHRYN PRESTON, Bankruptcy Judge.

This cause came on for hearing on September 5, 2014 upon two Motions for Pauper Status (Docs. # 323 and 324) filed by Patricia A. Byers, a creditor in the above captioned Chapter 13 case. Ms. Byers seeks waiver of the filing fee charged by the clerk of court in connection with two appeals commenced by Ms. Byers. Present at the hearing were Ms. Byers (hereinafter, “Creditor”) and Amy Gullifer, representing Debtor Frank M. Byers, III.1

The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and General Order 05-02 entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, referring all bankruptcy matters to this Court. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157.

I. Findings of Fact

Based upon arguments presented and evidence adduced at the hearing, the Court finds and concludes as follows:

Debtor Frank M. Byers, III (hereinafter, “Debtor”) filed a petition for relief under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code in 2007. Creditor is the former spouse of Debtor. Although Creditor was active in the early stages of the case,2 her filings were ultimately resolved,3 and Debtor’s Chapter 13 Plan proceeded to confirmation. Debtor’s Discharge was entered on December 30, 2013.

Creditor subsequently commenced an aggressive campaign of filings designed to secure payment of her prepetition claim. [521] Among the motions she filed were a Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Creditor Patricia A. Byers’ Motion for an Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal (Doc. # 307), and a “Request by Determination of the Court Debtor Amend the Creditor Matrix List” (Doc. # 308). Both motions were denied. See Order Denying Creditor/Appellant Patricia A. Byers’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Creditor Patricia Byers’ Motion for Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal (Doc. # 312) and Order Denying Creditor Patricia A. Byers’ Request That Court Direct Debtor to Amend the Creditor Matrix (Doc. # 311). Creditor timely filed a notice of appeal of each order and a motion for leave to appeal regarding each order.4 Creditor contemporaneously filed a Motion for Pauper Status (hereinafter collectively, the “Motions”) with respect to each appeal.

As required by statute, an Affidavit is attached to each of the Motions. Aside from the issues on appeal articulated in the Affidavits, the Affidavits are identical. They reflect that Creditor is single with no dependents. As of July 14, 2014, Creditor was unemployed, and her sole source of income was from gifts amounting to $500. Creditor represented in the Affidavits that she does not have a vehicle or a home or any other real estate. The only assets disclosed were $20 in cash, $1,000 in a checking account, a Chriscraft boat and 18' trailer, and amounts that she asserts Debt- or owes her. The Affidavits set forth her expenses as follows:

Rent or mortgage payment $0

Utilities 0

Food 500

Clothing 200

Laundry/dry cleaning 50

Medieal/dental expense 100

Recreation/entertainment 100

Health insurance 220

Motor vehicle insurance 600

Hill Storage 125

Motor vehicle expense 100

Ohio realtor’s license fees 100

Cell phone 145

Total $2,240

The evidence elicited at the evidentiary hearing on Creditor’s Motions painted a somewhat different picture. Most notably, she is not, in fact, paying many of the expenses listed in her Affidavit. She is not paying health care insurance, motor vehicle insurance, the fee for a storage unit where her household goods are housed, fees associated with a realtor license that she has previously held or a car installment payment. Of the remaining expenses listed on her Affidavits (in the approximate amount of $1,095), Creditor has significant discretionary expenses: she enjoys golf outings and eats out. She testified that she dines out “quite a bit”.

Creditor’s income of $500 per month has come from friends and parents. She no longer receives any funds from her parents, but receives funds from other sources occasionally, including, surprisingly, Debt- or. A few weeks prior to the hearing, Creditor obtained part time employment as a care giver for a young adult with special needs. She has been hired by the parents of the young adult, at the rate of $10 per hour. She was hired to work a specific schedule of twelve hours per week, but she also fills in when other care givers are not available. She is paid weekly. Her first paychecks were approximately $250.

[522] Creditor does not have a vehicle of her Own. Her vehicle was totaled in a car accident. In late July, she received approximately $5,000 from insurance for the loss. She used some of the funds to pay the filing fee for an adversary proceeding she has recently commenced against Debt- or and to pay the fee charged by the clerk of court for recordings that she has ordered of various court hearings. She has been using the remaining funds for her living expenses. But Creditor is not without transportation: Creditor’s mother is allowing Creditor to use her car, at no direct cost to Creditor. Creditor allegedly pays some of her mother’s bills and expenses in exchange for use of the vehicle, although the Court finds this difficult to believe, inasmuch as Creditor purportedly has little income.

In addition to the assets disclosed in the Affidavits, Creditor owns household goods5 which she described as “highly valuable”. In her testimony, she highlighted the fact that, after her divorce from Debtor, she had had to store household furnishings and personal belongings that had filled a 6,000 square foot home. She described some of her household items: Bernhardt armoires, a leather sofa, silk chairs, an extended marble-topped buffet, silver items, many sets of Lennox dishes, expensive lamps, golf clubs and very nice clothing. Additionally, she shared that she had given “beautiful” (as she described it) bedroom furniture and antiques to her children. Her children also have her dining furniture; it is not clear whether she gave it to them or just loaned it to them.

Finally, the Affidavits state that Creditor has paid or will be paying $40,000 of attorney fees in connection with this litigation. However, under cross examination at the hearing, Creditor conceded that she has actually paid counsel only $7,500. And Creditor is currently proceeding pro se in all matters before this Court.

II. Analysis

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

In re Byers, 519 B.R. 519, 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 4396, 2014 WL 5486433 (Ohio 2014).

519 B.R. 519 (In re Byers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Lineberry
344 B.R. 487 (W.D. Virginia, 2006)
In Re Fromal
151 B.R. 733 (E.D. Virginia, 1993)
In Re Phillips
375 B.R. 201 (W.D. Virginia, 2007)