Matter of Martin

40 B.R. 695
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia
DecidedMay 21, 1984
Docket15-63774
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 40 B.R. 695 (Matter of Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Martin, 40 B.R. 695 (Ga. 1984).

Opinion

WILLIAM L. NORTON, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

I. JURISDICTION

1.

This court finds that the Respondent in the above-named cases, Gene Martin, was duly and properly served with process in each of the above named cases, and that he is subject to the jurisdiction of this court.

II. FINDINGS OF FACT

In consideration of the testimony presented by the Chapter 13 trustee and the debtors in the above-named cases at a combined hearing held September 15, 1983, at'which Gene Martin attended and heard all the testimony, was permitted to cross-examine the witnesses, and in consideration of the documents and other matters made a part of the record of these cases, this court finds:

2.

In case number 83-00044A, Warren Johnson, debtor, it is found that Mr. Gene Martin, the respondent in this proceeding in these cases, (hereinafter called “Martin”), prepared the petition for the debtor, or arranged for its preparation under his supervision and employ by aides of Martin, made certain explanations to the debtor of the bankruptcy laws, for which the debtor paid $300.00 for these services. This court finds these actions to be in violation of one or more of the provisions of its Order of February 2, 1982, in the proceeding styled “In the Matter of Martin ”, 18 B.R. 28, (West Pub Co.) (hereinafter called this court’s “Prior Martin Order”). This court further finds these actions by Martin to be and constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

3.

In case number 83-00433A, Edwina Ware, debtor, it is found that Martin helped the debtor with the preparation of the petition. The court finds the testimony regarding Martin’s unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA to be inconclusive. However, the court does find Martin to have violated this court’s Prior Martin Order which prohibits Martin to assist debtors in the filing and preparation of bankruptcy cases in this court for compensation.

4.

In case number 83-01606A, Gwendolyn Clark, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared, and made certain explanations to the debtor of the bankruptcy laws for which the debtor paid at least $300.00 for these services. This court finds these actions by Martin to be in violation of this court’s Prior Martin Order which prohibits Martin to assist debtors in the preparation and filing of bankruptcy cases in this court for compensation and to constitute the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

*697 5.

In case number 83-02612A, Willie Fan-nin, Jr., debtor, it is found that Martin advised the debtor to file a petition under Chapter 13, and prepared the petition for the debtor, or caused it to be prepared by aides under his supervision and employ, even though the debtor expressly stated to Martin that the debtor did not wish to file a bankruptcy case. The court finds that Martin advised the debtor and made certain explanations of the bankruptcy laws and about foreclosure of real estate under Georgia law, and that he was paid $300.00 by or on behalf of the debtor for these services. This court finds Martin’s said actions to be in violation of this court’s Prior Martin Order which prohibits Martin to assist debtors in the preparation and filing of bankruptcy cases in this court for compensation, and to constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

6.

In case number 83-03010A, Ranee P.L. Allman, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared by aides in his employ under his supervision, and made certain explanation of the bankruptcy laws to the debtor, and for which the debtor paid at least $300.00 for these services. This court finds Martin’s said actions to be in violation of this court’s Prior Martin Order, and to constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

7.

In case number 83-03013A, Allen A. Brown, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared by aides in his employ under his supervision, and made certain explanation of the bankruptcy laws to the debtor, and for which the debtor paid at least $300.00 for these services. This court finds Martin’s said actions to be in violation of this court’s Prior Martin Order, and to constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

8.

In case number 83-03055A, Virginia P. Battle, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared by aides in his employ under his supervision, and made certain explanations of the bankruptcy laws to the debtor, charged the debtor a fee for a search of the title to a parcel of land owned by the debtor, and the debtor paid at least $300.00 for these services. This court finds Martin’s said actions to be in violation of one or more provisions of this court’s Prior Martin Order, and to constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

9.

In case number 83-02565A, Susan Sink-field, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared by aides in his employ under his supervision, caused the debtor to file a false or misleading “pro se” affidavit with the Clerk of this Court, and made certain explanation of the bankruptcy laws to the debtor, and that the debtor paid at least $300.00 for these services. This court finds Martin’s said actions to be in violation of this court’s Prior Martin Order, and to constitute the rendition of legal services and the unauthorized practice of law in violation of § 15-19-51 OCGA.

10.

In case number 83-02639A, Cherlyn Grace, debtor, failed to appear, and no evidence was received by the court. There being no evidence presented by the Chapter 13 trustee in case number 83-02639A, the matter of Cherlyn Grace, the trustee’s application in this case is denied.

11.

In case number 83-02582A, John Grigs-by, debtor, it is found that Martin prepared the debtor’s petition, or had it prepared by aides in his employ and under his supervision, and made certain explanations of the bankruptcy laws to the debtor, and for *698 which the debtor paid a fee of at least $200.00 for these services; that the debtor did not pay Martin the full amount of fee which Martin had demanded because the deputy trustee, at the hearing in this matter under § 341, directed the debtor to make no further payments to Mr. Martin without the approval of this court. The deputy trustee's action is specifically adopted, and the debtor is hereby ordered and enjoined to make no further payment to Martin and Martin is hereby enjoined from any attempts or contacts whatsoever to collect any further sums from the debtor for such bankruptcy services.

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

Related

McDermott v. Langevin
587 B.R. 173 (N.D. Georgia, 2018)
In Re Babies
315 B.R. 785 (N.D. Georgia, 2004)
In Re Soulisak
227 B.R. 77 (E.D. Virginia, 1998)
Matter of Bright
171 B.R. 799 (E.D. Michigan, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 B.R. 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-martin-ganb-1984.