Jeffery G. Dailey and Tycoon Motorsports, LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
In re:
JEFFERY G. DAILEY, 	Case No. 	25-80078-PRT
Chapter 7
Debtor.
AMERICAN BANK AND TRUST
COMPANY, an Oklahoma banking
Association,
Plaintiff,
vs. 	Adversary No. 25-8012-PRT
JEFFERY G. DAILEY,
Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
AND DISMISSING ADVERSARY CASE
Before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support
(ECF No. 32). After reviewing the motion, case file and applicable law, the Court finds that the
motion for summary judgment should be denied, and this adversary case should be dismissed.
________________________________________________________________
Dated: March 19, 2026
The following is ORDERED:
Case 25-80078 Doc 733 Filed 03/19/26 Entered 03/19/26 14:26:23 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 4

Background
On February 14, 2025, Debtor Jeffery G. Dailey (“Dailey”) filed the above-referenced
bankruptcy case (the “Main Case”) as a voluntary proceeding under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy
Code.1
On May 16, 2025, Plaintiff American Bank and Trust Company (“American Bank”) filed
this adversary proceeding against Dailey.2 A Summons and Complaint were served upon Dailey
by agreement of his counsel, Gary Hammond.3 Dailey filed his Answer on June 12, 2025.4 Mr.
Hammond withdrew as Dailey’s counsel in this case on November 12, 2025.5
On December 1, 2025, the United States Trustee filed an adversary proceeding seeking to
deny Dailey’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2), (3), (4) and (5).6 Although served at
the address Dailey provided to the Court, Dailey failed to answer or appear in that case. The
Bankruptcy Court Clerk entered default on January 12, 2026.
Plaintiff American Bank filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in this adversary case on
January 15, 2026, seeking a judgment of nondischargeability against Dailey pursuant to 11
U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(2)(B) and (a)(6). Dailey did not file a response.
On January 16, 2026, the United States Trustee filed a Motion for Default Judgment in its
case seeking denial of discharge.7 Dailey did not file an objection or response; therefore, on
February 4, 2026, an Order granting the Motion for Default Judgment and a Journal Entry of
1 Case No. 25-80078, ECF No. 1.
2 ECF No. 1.
3 ECF No. 6.
4 ECF No. 7.
5 ECF No. 23. Mr. Hammond also withdrew as counsel for Dailey in the Main Case on
November 13, 2025. ECF No. 596.
6 Case No. 25-8027, ECF No. 1.
7 Case No. 25-8027, ECF No. 8.
Case 25-80078 Doc 733 Filed 03/19/26 Entered 03/19/26 14:26:23 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 4

Default Judgment was entered denying Dailey’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2), (3),
(4) and (5).8 The Order and Judgment were also filed in the Main Case.9
Discussion
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and may decide only “cases” or
“controversies.” In re Lotspeich, 328 B.R. 209, 216 (10th Cir. BAP 2005) (citing U.S. Const.,
art. III, § 2, cl. 1). A case that ceases to present a “live controversy with respect to which the
court can give meaningful relief” is moot. See In re Jain, 626 B.R. 336, 341 (Bankr. D.N.M.
2021) citing Ethredge v. Hail, 996 F.2d 1173, 1175 (11th Cir. 1993); accord In re W. Pac.
Airlines, Inc., 181 F.3d 1191, 1194 (10th Cir. 1999) (“[A] case becomes moot when it becomes
impossible for the court to grant any effectual relief whatever to a prevailing party.”) Courts do
not have jurisdiction over moot cases. Citizens for Responsible Gov't State Political Action
Comm. v. Davidson, 236 F.3d 1174, 1181–82 (10th Cir. 2000).
Dailey’s denial of discharge renders this adversary case moot. The effect of the denial of
discharge is that all debts that Dailey owed as of the date he filed bankruptcy are
nondischargeable, including his debt to American Bank. The denial of Dailey’s discharge
pursuant to § 727 provides the same relief to American Bank that it seeks via this adversary case:
any debt that Dailey or the substantively consolidated debtors owed to American Bank will not
be discharged in this chapter 7 bankruptcy. This Court is no longer able to grant American Bank
“any meaningful relief in addition to what it has already received” pursuant to the order denying
discharge. In re DuMouchelle, 655 B.R. 120, 124 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2023) (citations omitted).
Issuing findings or an opinion pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523 would not change the outcome for
8 Case No. 25-8027, ECF Nos. 12 and 13.
9 Case No. 25-80078, ECF Nos. 691 and 692.
Case 25-80078 Doc 733 Filed 03/19/26 Entered 03/19/26 14:26:23 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 4

American Bank. Lacking a case or controversy and unable to provide further relief, this case is
moot. Therefore, the Court lacks jurisdiction over this case and it will be dismissed.
Order of the Court
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff American Bank and Trust Company’s
Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support (ECF No. 32) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this adversary case is hereby dismissed.
###
Case 25-80078 Doc 733 Filed 03/19/26 Entered 03/19/26 14:26:23 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 4