Carter, Matter of, 82-1138

Decision Date20 October 1982
Docket NumberNo. 82-1138,82-1138
Parties7 Collier Bankr.Cas.2d 683, 9 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 1086, Bankr. L. Rep. P 68,882 In the Matter of Maymie Clara CARTER, Debtor. Maymie Clara CARTER, Appellee, v. Austin E. VAN BUSKIRK; Charles E. Beckner. Jack Lewis, Appellant. Gary Allen; Century Management, Inc.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Richard W. Shankland, Maurice B. Soltz, Kansas City, Mo., for appellee.

Jack A. Lewis, North Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.

Before HEANEY and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal, Jack Lewis, attorney for Century Management, Inc., seeks reversal of the district court's 1 order upholding an order of the bankruptcy court finding him in civil contempt and assessing compensatory damages and attorney's fees. The contempt determination was based upon Century's eviction of the plaintiff-debtor, which the court concluded was in violation of the bankruptcy court's restraining order supplementing the automatic stay provision of 11 U.S.C. § 362. We affirm.

In October of 1979, plaintiff-debtor Maymie Clara Carter filed a bankruptcy petition under Chapter 13; the petition was confirmed on December 4, 1979. Century Management, Carter's landlord, was not listed as a creditor on the bankruptcy schedules, apparently because Carter was not delinquent in her rent at the time the bankruptcy case was initiated.

Carter subsequently fell behind in her rent, and Century commenced an action in state court to recover payments due and for possession of the premises. Service was obtained through the posting of notices. See Mo.Rev.Stat. § 535.030 (1978). Carter testified she then contacted an agent of Century, and was told that if her rent were paid by March 6, 1980 it would be unnecessary for her to appear at the state court hearing. She further testified that the arrearage in rental payments was made up in late February. On March 6 Century nonetheless apparently obtained a default judgment against Carter for possession only.

In late March Century sent Carter a notice to vacate. On April 2 she was contacted by a deputy sheriff, who notified her that she would be required to vacate her apartment on the following morning. Upon notification by Carter of this development, her attorney obtained the restraining order from the bankruptcy court. Copies of this order, which was identical to the order issued with respect to the automatic stay, were mailed to Lewis and hand-delivered to the administrator of the state court which had issued the default judgment against Carter. Carter's attorney also telephoned Lewis that afternoon, but was unable to reach him. He again called Lewis the following morning, and informed him of the Chapter 13 proceeding, the automatic stay and the bankruptcy court's restraining order. Lewis admits that he received this telephone call. He did not contact the bankruptcy court to verify the existence of the bankruptcy case and restraining order, however. Instead, he only inquired of Century as to whether it had received notice of the matter, which it had not. Consequently, Lewis did not act to stop the eviction, and Carter, along with her possessions, was removed from the apartment.

Carter then initiated this action, requesting that Lewis and Century, along with two officials in the state court administrator's office, be adjudged in contempt. Following a hearing, the bankruptcy court concluded Lewis was in contempt, and assessed damages and attorney's fees in a total amount of $587.92 against him. Lewis's appeal to the district court, as noted, was unsuccessful. This appeal followed.

Lewis...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • Matter of Schewe
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Western District of Michigan
    • January 12, 1989
    ...the bankruptcy court to conduct a hearing on damages immediately after having decided the contempt issue."); Carter v. Van Buskirk (In re Carter), 691 F.2d 390 (8th Cir.1982); Fidelity Mortgage Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc. (In re Fidelity Mortgage Investors), 550 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 197......
  • In re Petroleum Piping Contractors, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Indiana
    • February 28, 1997
    ...notice to be effective. In re Lile, 103 B.R. 830, 836 (Bankr.S.D.Tex. 1989); Matter of Carter, 16 B.R. 481, 482-83 (W.D.Mo.1981), aff'd. 691 F.2d 390; In re O'Connor, 42 B.R. 390, 392 (Bankr.Ark.1984); In re Stucka, 77 B.R. 777, 781 (Bankr. C.D.Cal.1987); In re Victoria Grain Co. of Minneap......
  • In re Arminio
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Connecticut
    • March 16, 1984
    ...In re Johns-Manville Corporation, 26 B.R. 919 (Bkrtcy.S.D. N.Y.1983); Matter of Carter, 16 B.R. 481 (D.C.W. D.Mo.W.D.1981) aff'd 691 F.2d 390 (8th Cir. 1982). 2 During the trial, the parties stipulated to certain facts including those stated herein, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3 Plaintiff's Exh......
  • In re Colon
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • June 7, 1990
    ...courts nevertheless had granted monetary relief against creditors that violated the bankruptcy stay. See, e.g., Matter of Carter, 691 F.2d 390 (8th Cir.1982); Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Hall, 685 F.2d 1306 (11th Cir.1982); In re Miller, 22 B.R. 479 (D.Md.1982). Indeed, they granted rel......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT