Alexis Mager Lakusta

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MEMORANDUM RE DEBTOR’S
MOTION FOR ABANDONMENT
-1-
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In re 	) Case No. 02-31521 TC
)
ALEXIS MAGER LAKUSTA, 	) Chapter 7
)
) Date: May 12, 2006
) Time: 9:30 a.m.
) Ctrm: Courtroom 23
)
Debtor. 	)
)
MEMORANDUM RE DEBTOR’S MOTION FOR ABANDONMENT
Debtor filed a motion to compel trustee to abandon certain
claims of the estate against Mark Evans and other parties (the
Motion). 	The Motion does not identify these claims, except to note
that they “includ[e] but [are] not limited to all of the claims
alleged in Lakusta v. Evans, Adversary Proceeding No. 02-3125 in
this court, and Lakusta v. Evans, et al., Adversary Proceeding No.
03-3549 in this court.”
The first of the two adversary proceedings identified was
dismissed, the second resulted in a judgment against Lakusta and
the estate. 	Debtor, who had prosecuted the action on behalf of the
estate, filed a motion for relief from judgment that was denied,
but did not appeal either the judgment or the order denying relief
from judgment. 	Debtor now seeks to file a new suit against Evans
Signed and Filed: May 11, 2006
________________________________________
THOMAS E. CARLSON
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
________________________________________
Entered on Docket
May 12, 2006
GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK
U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case: 02-31521 Doc# 242 Filed: 05/11/06 Entered: 05/12/06 11:20:52 Page 1 of
4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MEMORANDUM RE DEBTOR’S
MOTION FOR ABANDONMENT
-2-
and other parties for claims arising out of the same transaction as
that involved in the action tried to judgment, stating that he
“believes there may be grounds to set aside the judgment.”
The bankruptcy case is about to be closed. 	Unless this court
orders otherwise, all property of the estate that was listed in the
schedules and that has not been administered will be abandoned to
Debtor upon closing of the case. 	11 U.S.C. § 554(d). 	Assuming
arguendo that the claims in question were listed in the schedules
and are thus subject to such abandonment, I determine that this is
an instance in which the court should “order otherwise” and that
the claims in question should not be abandoned. 	Lakusta has had
his day in court. 	He now seeks to attempt to relitigate (likely at
great cost to the other parties involved and perhaps to the
inconvenience of the trustee and his counsel) the issues resolved
via a long-final judgment.
I further determine that oral argument would not be helpful
and would impose substantial unnecessary cost on the trustee and
the numerous parties who have filed opposition to the Motion.
The court will therefore enter a separate order providing
that: (1) the Motion is denied; (2) pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 554 no
legal claims against any party shall be abandoned to Debtor upon
closing of the case or otherwise; (3) trustee remains the real
party in interest in any action filed by Debtor pursuant to the
Order Granting Limited Relief From Stay entered on April 18, 2006;
(4) such relief from stay is hereby vacated; (5) the trustee shall
///
///
///
Case: 02-31521 Doc# 242 Filed: 05/11/06 Entered: 05/12/06 11:20:52 Page 2 of
4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MEMORANDUM RE DEBTOR’S
MOTION FOR ABANDONMENT
promptly take all necessary steps to dismiss any such actions
Debtor filed; and (6) the scheduled May 12, 2006 hearing on the
Motion is vacated.
**END OF MEMORANDUM**
Case: 02-31521 Doc# 242 Filed: 05/11/06 Entered: 05/12/06 11:20:52 Page 3 of
4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Court Service List
Alexis Mager Lakusta
1259 El Camino Real, Suite 245
Menlo Park, CA 94025
David A. Schuricht, Esq.
Law Offices of Katzen and Schuricht
1981 North Broadway, Suite 340
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
David V. Duperrault, Esq.
Silicon Valley Law Group
25 Metro Drive, Suite 600
San Jose, CA 95110
David A. Boone, Esq.
Law Offices of David A. Boone
1611 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
Catherine Schlomann Robertson, Esq.
Pahl and Gosselin
225 West Santa Clara Street
Suite 1500
San Jose, CA 95113-1700
Office of the U.S. Trustee
235 Pine Street
Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94104
Case: 02-31521 Doc# 242 Filed: 05/11/06 Entered: 05/12/06 11:20:52 Page 4 of
4