The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
03-40609•Orix Credit Alliance v. R & R Rentals Inc, et al
03-40609Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitDec 8, 2003
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should
not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth
in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
December 8, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________________
No. 03-40609
__________________________
In the Matter Of: JEROLDE CLARK PARKS
Debtor,
------------------------------------
ORIX CREDIT ALLIANCE INC “EX REL” For Ben B. Floyd Trustee
Appellant,
versus
R & R RENTALS INC; ROBERT N. HERRINGTON
Appellees.
___________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(No. M-02-CV-25)
___________________________________________________
Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
-- 1 of 2 --
2
Orix Credit Alliance appeals an adverse decision in the district court—which
adopted the holdings of the bankruptcy court—arguing that: (1) the bankruptcy court did
not have jurisdiction to rule on the contract dispute; and (2) if that court were vested with
jurisdiction, it erred in entering a take-nothing judgment. Both contentions are misplaced.
The bankruptcy court clearly had jurisdiction to adjudicate this contract dispute that
was “related to” the bankruptcy case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). We cannot say that the
bankruptcy court, after properly exercising jurisdiction, committed clear error in finding
that a contract had not been formed and in entering a take-nothing judgment.
For these reasons, the decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.