Ohio v. Kovacs

755 F.2d 484, 22 ERC 1432
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 18, 1985
DocketNo. 81-3320
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 755 F.2d 484 (Ohio v. Kovacs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ohio v. Kovacs, 755 F.2d 484, 22 ERC 1432 (6th Cir. 1985).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This court, by per curiam opinion decided June 16, 1982, affirmed the decision of the bankruptcy court and the district court that appellee, the debtor Kovacs, was entitled, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362 (West Supp. 1979), to an automatic stay of a proceeding in the Common Pleas Court of Butler County, Ohio. In re Kovacs, 681 F.2d 454 (6th Cir.1982). The stay applied to an effort by Ohio to have the debtor’s current income applied to satisfy his obligation, created by a pre-bankruptcy consent decree, to clean up certain industrial waste.

Thereafter, the bankruptcy court and the district court further held that Ohio’s claim against Kovacs is dischargeable, and another panel of this court ultimately affirmed. In re Kovacs, 717 F.2d 984 (6th Cir.1983).

Ohio petitioned for certiorari in the instant case, and Kovacs sought a remand in the Supreme Court on the ground that the issue whether the automatic stay provision applied had become moot since the bankruptcy court and the district court had held the claim to be dischargeable. On January 24, 1983 (No. 82-815) the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the judgment of this court, and remanded to determine mootness. 459 U.S. 1167, 103 S.Ct. 810, 74 L.Ed.2d 1010. This court has taken no action on such remand, awaiting final adjudication of the dischargeability issue.

Thereafter, as stated, this court affirmed the decision of the bankruptcy and district courts that the involved claim is discharge-able. The Supreme Court then granted certiorari and affirmed the decision of this court that the claim is dischargeable. — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 705, 83 L.Ed.2d 649 (1985).

[485]*485Accordingly, it appears to this court that this cause is now moot and the appeal is therefore dismissed.

It is so Ordered.

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

Related

In Re Kovacs
755 F.2d 484 (Sixth Circuit, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
755 F.2d 484, 22 ERC 1432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohio-v-kovacs-ca6-1985.