Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

CHARLIE ANDERSON, Appellant, v. MICHAEL D. WEST, et al, Appellees. CHARLIE ANDERSON, Appellant,

MEMORANDUM ORDER

NORWOOD TILLEY, Chief Judge, District

This appeal arises out of a Memorandum Opinion and its accompanying orders entered on February 13, 2004, by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in the bankruptcy cases of Victor Euglous Graham and Julie R. Kendrick. In re Graham, No. 02-81930C-7D, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 1678, (Bankr. M.D.N.C. Feb. 13, 2004). The opinion resolved issues about the propriety under § 110 of the Bankruptcy Code of Mr. Anderson's services as a bankruptcy petition preparer to Mr. Graham and Ms. Kendrick. The Bankruptcy Court ordered that Mr. Anderson be fined in the amount of $500.00 in each of the cases pursuant to § 110(b)(2) and § 110(c)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code; that $119.00 of the fee charged by Mr. Anderson in each of the cases be disallowed and turned over to the Trustee in each of the cases pursuant to § 110(h)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code; and that Mr. Anderson had committed fraudulent, unfair, or deceptive acts and certified this issue to the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina pursuant to § 110(i)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. This matter is currently before the Court on appeal by Mr. Anderson. Oral arguments were held on March 23, 2005. After considering the parties' briefs and oral arguments, this Court adopts the reasoning outlined in Judge Stocks' bankruptcy opinion. Id.

Now, therefore, it is ordered that the decision and the orders of the Bankruptcy Court, entered February 13, 2004, ordering Mr. Anderson to pay fines and turn over excessive fees to the appropriate Trustee, as well as certifying to this Court that Mr. Anderson committed fraudulent, unfair, or deceptive acts are AFFIRMED for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion of the Bankruptcy Court.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ANDERSON v. WEST
(Apr 14, 2005)