In re: STEVEN R. LOWE Debtor ------------------------------ STEVEN R. LOWE v. Sheehan & Associates, Plc

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 13a0290n.06
No. 12-2118
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
In re: STEVEN R. LOWE
Debtor
------------------------------
STEVEN R. LOWE,
Appellant,
v.
SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, PLC,
Appellee.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE: GILMAN, ROGERS, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.
ROGERS, Circuit Judge. In a Chapter 7 bankruptcy action, debtor Steven R. Lowe seeks the
discharge of debts owed to creditor Sheehan & Associates, PLC (“Sheehan”), a law firm. Sheehan
opposes the discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(3) because Lowe failed to keep and disclose records
of payments made by Lowe’s parents directly to Sheehan—which were in effect loans to Lowe—for
legal services that Sheehan provided to Lowe over a ten-year period, and under § 727(a)(4)(A)
because Lowe made a false statement, with fraudulent intent, on a matter material to the bankruptcy.
The bankruptcy court denied discharge of Lowe’s debt under both § 727(a)(3) and (a)(4), and, in a
careful and well-analyzed opinion, the district court affirmed on both issues. Sheehan & Assocs.,

-- 1 of 2 --

PLC v. Lowe (In re Lowe), No. 12-11768, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105871, Bankr. L. Rep. (CCH)
P82, 322 (E.D. Mich. July 30, 2012).
We find no error in the district court’s judgment. Because the reasons why Lowe’s debt
should not be discharged have been fully articulated by the district court, the issuance of a detailed
opinion by this court would be duplicative and would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, we
affirm the judgment of the district court based on the reasoning set out by that court in its order dated
July 30, 2012.

-- 2 of 2 --