Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

Native Vill. of Port Heiden v. Crandall (In re Crandall)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA
Nov 17, 2017

FREDERICK P. CORBIT Chief Bankruptcy Court Judge

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MEMORANDUM DECISION RE: PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL

INTRODUCTION

The Native Village of Port Heiden (NVPH) commenced this adversary proceeding to hold debtor Thomas Lee Crandall, Jr. individually liable for an obligation of his company, Emagyne Management Services, LLC, that arose from a $102,940.33 state court judgment entered against Emagyne Management. NVPH requests a jury trial for issues relating to this claim. NVPH also seeks to hold any debt owed to it as nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. ยงยง 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(6).

DISCUSSION

NVPH seeks to establish Mr. Crandall's personal liability for a debt owed to it by Emagyne Management through its veil piercing claim and its claim of personal liability post-dissolution. NVPH's request for a jury trial on these issues is denied for two primary reasons.

First, NVPH filed a proof of claim in the main bankruptcy case (Case No. A-15-00151). Once a party has submitted a claim against the bankruptcy estate, the intent is to recover from the estate, and the party has thus consented to the bankruptcy court's equitable power to allow or disallow claims and waived any right to a jury. Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33, 59 n.14 (1989); Matter of Peachtree Lane Ass'n, Ltd., 150 F.3d 788, 798 (7th Cir. 1998).

Second, determining the validity and amount of a claim is an essential part of the claims allowance process. In re Rouette, 564 B.R. 157, 162 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2017). Therefore, any determinations concerning whether a particular debt is or is not discharged is central to the bankruptcy process and is properly within the bankruptcy court's authority to resolve without a jury. Am. Express Travel Related Servs. Co. v. Hashemi (In re Hashemi), 104 F.3d 1122, 1123 (9th Cir. 1997). feasible). Thus, no Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial attends such an adjudication. Valle, 469 B.R. at 43.

There is an additional reason to deny the jury demand. In the Notice Re: Plaintiff's Jury Demand (ECF No. 22), this court indicated to counsel it would deny NVPH's demand for a jury trial unless an objection was filed with court by October 27, 2017. Neither party timely objected to this court's notice: Mr. Crandall filed a notice consistent with this court's notice and NVPH filed nothing. --------

For the reasons set forth, this court will enter an order denying NVPH's request for a jury trial.

DATED this 17th day of November, 2017.

/s/ Frederick P. Corbit


FREDERICK P. CORBIT


Chief Bankruptcy Court Judge Serve: Samuel J. Fortier, Esq. (for Plaintiff)


Chris Johansen, Esq. (for Defendant)


Thomas Lee Crandall, Jr. (Defendant/Debtor)