3:09-bk-31874•Madan Mohan Singh Ahluwalia and Manka Ahluwalia
Full text
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 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA In re MADAN AHLUWALIA, Debtor. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 09-31874 Chapter 7 MEMORANDUM RE DEBTOR’S MOTION TO REOPEN AND CHARLES OLIVER’S COUNTERMOTION FOR RULE 9011 SANCTIONS Upon due consideration, and for the reasons stated below: (1) Debtor’s motion to reopen his case for the purpose of discharging a postpetition claim is denied with prejudice; and (2) Charles Oliver’s motion for Rule 9011 sanctions is denied without prejudice. FACTS On July 6, 2009, Debtor filed the above-captioned, no-asset bankruptcy case. On December 3, 2009, the court entered Debtor’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a). On June 21, 2010, the bankruptcy case was closed. On March 25, 2011, Debtor filed a motion to reopen his bankruptcy case to schedule a debt arising out of a contract dated MEMO RE DEBTOR’S MTN TO REOPEN AND COUNTERMOTION FOR SANCTIONS -1- Signed and Filed: June 24, 2011 ________________________________________ THOMAS E. CARLSON U.S. Bankruptcy Judge ________________________________________ Entered on Docket June 27, 2011 GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case: 09-31874 Doc# 67 Filed: 06/24/11 Entered: 06/27/11 11:26:46 Page 1 of 3
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 April 2, 2010, under which Charles H. Oliver, Jr., a real estate broker, agreed to provide Debtor, an attorney, expert witnesses services. On April 6, 2011, Mr. Oliver filed an opposition to the motion to reopen, arguing that the claim is a postpetition claim that is not subject to the section 727(a) discharge, and that Debtor should be sanctioned under Rule 9011(c) for filing an allegedly frivolous motion. LAW 1. Motion to Reopen A bankruptcy case may be reopened to administer assets, to accord relief to the debtor, or for other cause. 11 U.S.C. § 350(b). The motion to reopen is denied with prejudice, because the motion seeks to reopen the case to discharge a postpetition debt, and because a discharge in bankruptcy applies only to prepetition debts. 11 U.S.C. § 727(b). 2. Motion for Rule 9011 sanctions A motion for sanctions under Rule 9011(c) “shall be made separately from other motions or requests . . .” Fed. R. Bankr. Proc. 9011(c)(1). In addition, a motion for sanctions “may not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days after service of the motion, . . . the challenged paper is not withdrawn . . . .” Mr. Oliver’s motion for sanctions is denied without prejudice, because it was not filed as a separate motion, and because it was filed prior to giving Debtor sufficient time to withdraw the motion. **END OF MEMORANDUM** MEMO RE DEBTOR’S MTN TO REOPEN AND COUNTERMOTION FOR SANCTIONS -2- Case: 09-31874 Doc# 67 Filed: 06/24/11 Entered: 06/27/11 11:26:46 Page 2 of 3
COURT SERVICE LIST Madan Mohan Singh Ahluwalia 406 Morning Lane Redwood City, CA 94065 Charles H. Oliver, Jr. 11400 Sun Valley Drive Oakland, CA 94605 Case: 09-31874 Doc# 67 Filed: 06/24/11 Entered: 06/27/11 11:26:46 Page 3 of 3
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.