Yelin v. Yelin

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 05-01341 Doc 44 Filed 02/23/06 Entered 02/24/06 15:11:29

Document

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

lu re
KAREN E. YELIN,

Debtor
LAURENCE YELIN,

Plaintiff
¥
KAREN E, YELIN,

Defendant

Chapter 7
Case No. 04-19960-RS

Adversary Proceeding

No. 05-1341

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

AND
ORDER

REGARDING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Desc Main

Before the Court is a motion for partial summary judgment (“Summary Judgment

Motion’) filed in an adversary proceeding in the within Chapter 7 case. In the adversary

proceeding, the Plaintiff seeks (a) deniai of the Debtor’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. sec.

727(ay(2MA) (“Discharge Claim’) and (b) an exception to discharge of the Plaintiff's clams

pursuant fo 11 LU SC see $23(a)2)(A) (Dischargeability Clann”). The Summary Judgment

Motion is limited to the Discharge Clamn.

Citing applicable and governing rules and decisions, the Plaintiff contends that, on the

ROT CATED

U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 05-01341 Doc 44 _ Filed 02/23/06 Entered 02/24/06 15:11:29 Desc Main
Document Page 2of3

uncontroverted facts before the Court, be is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ.
P. 56; Celotex Corp. V. Catreet, 477 U.S. 317 (1980); Kelly v. United States, 724 Fad 353 (1*
Cir. 1991), Conversely, the Debtor contends that summary Judgment is nol warranted where, as
here, a reasonable trier of fact could draw inferences favorable to her from the totality of the
circumstanees revealed by the undisputed evidence. Blanchard v. Peerless Ins, Co., 958 F2d
4§3, 488 (1* Cir. 1992),

The undisputed facts on which the Plaintiff bases ihe Summary Judgment Motion are
these: (a) in her Schedule J, and reaffirmed at her Section 34] meeting and (at least initially) at a
2004 examination, the Debtor represented that sie paid certain monthly household items when
she did not actually do so; and (b} in her Statement of Financial Affairs, the Debtor did not:
disclose certain monthly car lease and student loan payments (which are nunetheless lisied in her
Schedule J). The Plaintiff alleges that these statements and omissions are material and
knowingly and fraudulently made. The Debtor denies any fraudulent intent, contends that the
presentation of information regarding her househokl expenses oust be considered in the coutexi
of her household circumstances, and further coniends that airy nusstatemcnis or omissions were
careless and not deliberate.

On February t4, 2006, the Court held a hiearing on the Summary Judyment Motion.
Upon reflection and consideration of the materiais filed by the parties, the record of the
proceedings to date, and the representations and arguments of counsel at the hearing, the Court
discerns a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Debtor’s statements and omissions are

maternally misleading and, 1f a0, were made deliberately or curclessly, thus precluding summary

Case 05-01341 Doc 44 _ Filed 02/23/06 Entered 02/24/06 15:11:29 Desc Main
Document Page 3of3

judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, See fa re Furrasso, 37 F3d 760, 764 (1 Cir. 1994). Tn such
circumstances, the Court concludes thut the matter shouid be determined by trial and not by
suitrimary judgment,
ORDER
For the reasons set forth above. the Court hereby denies the Plamtiff!’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment. The trial in this adversary procecding shall be held on Wednesday,

March 15, 2006, commeneme at 10:00 aan.

aS
a” te aan Ptsan F Seg Ma
Dated: Aefrrury d 4, AOE Ae on

Robert Soma
United States Bankruptcy Judge

cc: Jon H. Kurland, Esq.
Joseph T, King, Esq.

hae