Michael Joseph Sindram

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
MICHAEL JOSEPH SINDRAM,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 08-00559
(Chapter 7)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE "VERIFIED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING
AND CONTEMPT MOTION; MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF EFFECTIVE COUNSEL"
The debtor Sindram has filed a document titled "Verified
Adversary Proceeding and Contempt Motion; Motion for Appointment
of Effective Counsel" docketed as Dkt. No. 268 in this case, and
not docketed as an adversary proceeding. 	The document appears to
seek contempt sanctions against Jamison Condominium Association,
but contempt is a matter that should be pursued by motion in the
main case without the necessity of filing an adversary
proceeding. 	Accordingly, although the caption treats the matter
as though it were an adversary proceeding, I will not treat it as
an adversary proceeding, and it will be dealt with as a motion in
this, the main case.
Paragraph 3 of the motion complains that:
The document below is hereby signed.
Signed: January 18, 2010.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 08-00559 Doc 272 Filed 01/20/10 Entered 01/20/10 15:04:46 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 3

2
During Bankruptcy petition period of this case
defendant continued to bill Disabled Veteran/Plaintiff
to violate Automatic Stay and cause Disabled
Veteran/Plaintiff undue burden, expense, and hardship
notwithstanding intentional infliction of emotional
distress. Defendant's wanton and willful rancorous
malicious misconduct and total disregard of Disabled
Veteran/Plaintiff's constitutionally-guaranteed rights
and interests to exacerbate his disability and increase
his pain.
These conclusory allegations do not suffice to establish a
violation of the automatic stay, and, moreover, the Jamison
Condominium Association’s alleged violations of the automatic
stay were the subject of Adversary Proceeding No.09-10037 in
which Sindram failed to prevail.
Paragraph 4 of the motion complains that “bogus”
foreclosure papers were served on Sindram’s co-debtor, Antonio
Almenara, to intimidate him as a witness in a proceeding in this
court, but the motion fails to specify what was “bogus” about the
foreclosure papers or what testimony was suppressed by way of the
alleged intimidation.
Paragraph 5 of the motion makes conclusory allegations
similar to those made in paragraph 3, and then alleges:
Defendant continues to violate Bankruptcy Code and
include pre-petition and petition amounts in
defendant's foreclosure and lien it unconstitutionally
placed on Disabled Veteran/Plaintiff's home to extort
funds not due and owed defendant.
But a lien claim in existence on the petition date is an in rem
claim that is unaffected by a chapter 7 discharge of unsecured
debts, and the motion does not suggest that the Association has
Case 08-00559 Doc 272 Filed 01/20/10 Entered 01/20/10 15:04:46 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 3

3	O:\TEEL\Judge Temp Docs\Sindram (Michael Joseph) -Order re Mtn for Contempt & to Appoint Effective Counsel.wpd
attempted to enforce any other kind of claim. 	Any dispute as to
what amount is owed pursuant to a lien claim presents an issue of
nonbankruptcy law, and does not demonstrate a violation of the
discharge injunction.
Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the motion go to what Sindram
complains was ineffective representation by counsel in Adversary
Proceeding No. 09-10037, but Sindram has not demonstrated good
grounds pursuant to which the court should appoint counsel with
respect to any of the matters addressed by his motion. 	It is
thus
ORDERED that the motion, titled "Verified Adversary
Proceeding and Contempt Motion; Motion for Appointment of
Effective Counsel" and docketed as Dkt. No. 268 in this case is
DENIED.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Debtor; Craig A. Parker, Esq.
Case 08-00559 Doc 272 Filed 01/20/10 Entered 01/20/10 15:04:46 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 3