in Re: Benjamin M. Brundage v. Helen Waite

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
__________
No. 05-4471
__________
IN RE: BENJAMIN M. BRUNDAGE,
Debtor
BENJAMIN M. BRUNDAGE
v.
HELEN WAITE,
Appellant
WILLIAM C. MILLER, CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE;
FREDERIC J. BAKER, U.S. TRUSTEE,
Trustees
__________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Civ. No. 05-CV-02310)
District Judge: Hon. Lawrence F. Stengel
__________

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)
September 24, 2007
Before: McKEE, BARRY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges
(Opinion Filed: October 24, 2007)
__________
OPINION
__________
McKee, Circuit Judge:
Helen Waite appeals the decision of the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania affirming the decision of the bankruptcy court ordering
her to dismiss the civil complaint that she filed in the Court of Common Pleas of
Philadelphia County seeking specific performance of a purchase offer letter for the sale of
real estate owned by Benjamin Brundage, and to pay attorney’s fees. Both the bankruptcy
court and the district court concluded that the plain language of the offer did not
constitute a valid agreement of sale, and that assuming arguendo that it did, the offer was
rejected in Brundage’s first bankruptcy. We agree and, for the reasons that follow, will
affirm.
Inasmuch as we write primarily for the parties and since the district court has set
forth the factual and procedural history of this case, it is not necessary to repeat the
factual or procedural background here. See In re Brundage, 2005 WL 2206076 (E.D. Pa.
Sept. 9, 2005). Moreover, in his Memorandum and Opinion, Judge Stengel has carefully

-- 2 of 3 --

3
and completely explained his reasons for finding that Waite did not have a valid
agreement of sale with Brundage and that Waite’s filing of a complaint lis pendens
violated the bankruptcy stay thereby justifying the award of attorney’s fees. We will
affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Stengle thoughtful and thorough
Memorandum Opinion.

-- 3 of 3 --