In re Garrison

492 B.R. 473, 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 6196, 2012 WL 8453341
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina
DecidedNovember 27, 2012
Docket11-06793
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 492 B.R. 473 (In re Garrison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Garrison, 492 B.R. 473, 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 6196, 2012 WL 8453341 (S.C. 2012).

Opinion

Chapter 13

CONSENT ORDER FINDING CIVIL CONTEMPT, REQUIRING DISGORGEMENT OF FEES, AND IMPOSING FINES

John E. Waites, Chief US Bankruptcy Judge

This proceeding comes before the Court upon a civil contempt Order and Rule to [475]*475Show Cause (the Rule) issued by the Court on December 2, 2011, regarding Sherwood Wayne Salmons (Mr. Salmons). The Rule required Mr. Salmons to appear before the Court and to show cause why he should not be held in civil contempt for acting as a bankruptcy petition preparer and engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in the present case in violation of an order entered July 13, 1999, by Judge J. Bratton Davis in McDow v. Salmons (In re Calvin DuBose), C/A No. 99-00385-bd, Adv. P. No. 99-00385-bd. That order permanently enjoined Mr. Salmons from acting as a bankruptcy petitioner preparer and from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.

The Court has jurisdiction of this proceeding under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157, 1334, and Local Civil Rule 83.IX.01 DSC. This matter is a core proceeding. 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2). Appropriate venue of this case and this proceeding resides in the District of South Carolina. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408-1409.

BACKGROUND

Mr. Salmons has a long troubled history with this Court as a bankruptcy petition preparer and as an individual engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Chief Judge J. Bratton Davis permanently enjoined Mr. Salmons from acting as a bankruptcy petition preparer and from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in this jurisdiction and in any other jurisdiction with the United States. McDow v. Salmons, supra. Mr. Salmons, however, was not deterred by the nationwide injunction. A few years later, on April 2, 2008, the Court entered an order and judgment against Mr. Salmons imposing fines of $27,500.00 under 11 U.S.C. § 110. See McDow v. Salmons (In re Tammy M. Roberts), C/A 07-06723-jw, Adv. P. No. 08-8008-jw (Bankr.D.S.C. April 2, 2008). That order required Mr. Salmons to pay the fines to the United States Trustee in accordance with 11 U.S.C. § 110(1)(4) within sixty days from the entry of the order. Mr. Salmons has not paid anything to date.1

The present matter first came before the Court during a status hearing held on November 22, 2011, which was scheduled under § 105(d) to review with the debtor in this case, Anna Y. Garrison, filing pro se, the requirements associated with the filing of a bankruptcy case. At that hearing the Court learned that the debtor had received assistance from Mr. Salmons in filing her case, including assistance in preparing or assisting her in securing documents for filing with the Court for which she paid Mr. Salmons the sum of $400. Being neither an attorney nor an employee of an attorney, Mr. Salmons was and still remains a bankruptcy petition preparer within the meaning of § 110(a). Mr. Salmon’s involvement in the present case was not disclosed in the debtor’s schedules, petition, or statement of financial affairs as required by § 110 and the Official Forms, a practice which Mr. Salmons has consistently maintained over the years.

On December 2, 2011, this Court issued the Rule requiring Mr. Salmons to appear and to explain his failure to comply with the July 13, 1999 order of the Court and to show cause why he should not be held in civil contempt and have fines imposed against him based upon § 110. Prior to the hearing on the Rule, Mr. Salmons filed correspondence with the Court stating that he would be unable to attend the Rule hearing on December 22, 2011, due to medical issues. As required by the Rule, he also disclosed that he had acted as a bankruptcy petition preparer in filing two [476]*476bankruptcy cases in 2011, a violation of the July 13, 1999, order. At the hearing on the Rule, counsel for the debtor appeared and indicated that, in her view, Mr. Salmons’ assistance and advice to the debtor were inaccurate, incomplete, and not beneficial. Also at the hearing, the chapter 13 trustee reported that based upon similarities of documents in other recent cases and statements by additional debtors, Mr. Salmons appeared to have been involved in and providing assistance in twelve other cases. The hearing on the Rule to Show Cause was continued to February 3, 2012.

On February 2, 2012, Mr. Salmons filed correspondence with the Court indicating that he would not appear at the February 3, 2012, hearing due to medical reasons. Counsel for the United States Trustee did appear and indicated that the United States Trustee would assist the Court in prosecuting the Rule. Counsel for the United States Trustee further indicated that Mr. Salmons had used medical excuses in past dealings with the United States Trustee to avoid making appearances in proceedings against him.

On February 23, 2012, the Court directed the United States Marshal to take Mr. Salmons into custody and to bring him before the Court on March 15, 2012. The Marshal brought Mr. Salmons before the Court, and he was examined by counsel for the United States Trustee. Mr. Salmons admitted at the hearing that since January 2008 he has for compensation prepared or assisted in the preparation or securing of documents for filing with this Court by individuals. He acknowledged that he provided this assistance with knowledge of the July 13, 1999 order of this Court permanently enjoining him from acting as a bankruptcy petition preparer and from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. He admitted providing assistance to the debtor in this case, Anna Garrison, and to one other debtor, Rigba Wolfe, Jr. He admitted that he received $400 from Ms. Garrison and $795 from Mr. Wolfe. Mr. Salmons claims that, rather than preparing the bankruptcy documents himself, he secured a bankruptcy petition preparer online to prepare the documents. He claims that he delivered the completed work product to the prospective debtors. Mr. Salmons admits involvement in the Wolfe and Garrison bankruptcy cases, and admits that there may be one or two others, but he could not remember any other cases, and he keeps no records from which this information could be obtained. He also admitted advising clients regarding the effects of fling a bankruptcy case and other topics such as the cost of filing, the proper place to file bankruptcy documents, the proper completion of the Official Forms, and the effect of the automatic stay. He further admitted taking credit counseling courses for prospective debtors, but he claims he did so with the debtors’ permission because they did not have a computer. He admitted that sometimes the debtors were not in the room when he took the online creditor counseling course for them. He admitted telling prospective debtors that he had access to skilled paralegals that could assist him in the preparation of bankruptcy documents. He guaranteed his clients that he could stop a foreclosure against their residence.

Mr. Salmons further testified at the hearing that as part of his compensation charged to prospective debtors he would talk to their mortgage companies to obtain workouts or some other arrangements to halt pending foreclosure actions.

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

Related

In re McDonald
497 B.R. 489 (D. South Carolina, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
492 B.R. 473, 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 6196, 2012 WL 8453341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-garrison-scb-2012.