In Re J. Richard Calder, Debtor. J. Richard Calder v. Steven Rupp, Trustee

Tenth Circuit

In Re J. Richard Calder, Debtor. J. Richard Calder v. Steven Rupp, Trustee

912 F.2d 454, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 15285, 1990 WL 125327

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided August 31, 1990·No. 89-4135·Published·Cited by 17 cases

Opinion

*455 PER CURIAM.

The only issue in this bankruptcy appeal is whether sums paid for attorney’s services rendered before debtor J. Richard Calder filed his petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code were assets of the bankruptcy estate. We cannot find the factual determinations by the bankruptcy judge, affirmed by the district court, to be clearly erroneous. Taking that as a starting point, we agree with the legal analysis of the bankruptcy judge and affirm, as did the district court, for substantially the reasons set forth in the bankruptcy judge’s opinion reported as Calder v. Segal (In re Colder), 94 B.R. 200 (Bankr.D.Utah 1988). 1

AFFIRMED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

1

. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

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

*455 PER CURIAM.

The only issue in this bankruptcy appeal is whether sums paid for attorney’s services rendered before debtor J. Richard Calder filed his petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code were assets of the bankruptcy estate. We cannot find the factual determinations by the bankruptcy judge, affirmed by the district court, to be clearly erroneous. Taking that as a starting point, we agree with the legal analysis of the bankruptcy judge and affirm, as did the district court, for substantially the reasons set forth in the bankruptcy judge’s opinion reported as Calder v. Segal (In re Colder), 94 B.R. 200 (Bankr.D.Utah 1988). 1

AFFIRMED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

1

. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

In Re J. Richard Calder, Debtor. J. Richard Calder v. Steven Rupp, Trustee, 912 F.2d 454, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 15285, 1990 WL 125327 (10th Cir. 1990).

Pincite

912 F.2d 454 (In Re J. Richard Calder, Debtor. J. Richard Calder v. Steven Rupp, Trustee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related