Fairfield Communities, Inc., In re
| Decision Date | 27 April 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-2250,97-2250 |
| Citation | 142 F.3d 1093 |
| Parties | In re FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor. FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor-Appellant, v. Phyllis G. DALESKE; Marie L. Eschenbach; Robert E. Fiedler; Shirley M. Fiedler; Charles B. West; Doris J. West; D. White, and Company Incorporated; Joan L. White, doing business as D.A. White Enterprises; William M. Storm; Bernice Storm; James Skrien; Liesel Skrien; Charles Decker; Mildred Decker; Dean Hall; Carolina Hall; Donald C. Rickard; Louis Teutsch; Geri Teutsch; Russell Lee; Charlotte Lee; Barbara Foster; George Forsythe; Dorothy Forsythe; Jose D. Gallegos; Patricia M. Gallegos; William A. Lucas; Nick Quaglietta; Charles B. West, Claimants-Appellees, In re FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor. William M. STORM; Bernice Storm; James Skrien; Liesel Skrien; Charles Decker; Mildred Decker; Dean Hall; Carolina Hall; Donald C. Rickard; Elaine G. Rickard; Louis Teutsch; Geri Teutsch; Russell Lee; Charlotte Lee; Barbara Foster; George Forsythe; Dorothy Forsythe; Jose D. Gallegos; Patricia M. Gallegos; William A. Lucas; Nick Quaglietta, Claimants-Appellees, v. FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor-Appellant, Phyllis G. Daleske; Arthur E. Eschenbach; Marie L. Eschenbach; Robert E. Fiedler; Shirley M. Fiedler; Charles B. West; Doris J. Weset; D.A. White & Company, Inc.; Joan L. White, doing business as D.A. White Enterprises, Debtors. In re FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor. FAIRFIELD COMMUNITIES, INC., Debtor-Appellant, v. John E. LOBDELL; Glinda S. Lobdell; Robert E. Fiedler; Shirley Fiedler, Claimants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Gregory M. Gordon, Dallas, TX, argued (Stephanie D. Curtis and Daniel P. Winikka, Dallas, TX, on the brief), for Appellant.
Gerald Sawatsky, Pagosa Springs, CO, argued (James E. Smith, Little Rock, AR, on the brief), for Appellees.
Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
In 1993 and 1994, owners of property in a development in the Colorado mountains sued the developer, Fairfield Communities, Inc., in Colorado state court, alleging that Fairfield had imposed on them a fee that is invalid under Colorado law. Fairfield, which had emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1992, then sued the property owners in the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, the court that had presided over Fairfield's Chapter 11 case, alleging that the property owners' claims had been discharged when the Bankruptcy Court confirmed Fairfield's plan of reorganization. In the Bankruptcy Court, the property owners filed motions to dismiss Fairfield's suits for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Bankruptcy Court held that it has jurisdiction over some but not all of Fairfield's claims. The District Court, 1 to which the Bankruptcy Court's decision was first appealed, held that the Bankruptcy Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over any of Fairfield's claims. Fairfield now appeals to us. There are no issues of fact, and we review de novo the legal question of whether the Bankruptcy Court has jurisdiction.
Generally, once a bankruptcy debtor's reorganization plan has been confirmed, as Fairfield's plan was before Fairfield initiated this case, "the estate of the debtor, and thus the bankruptcy court's jurisdiction, ceases to exist." Norwest Equip. Fin., Inc. v. Nath (In re D & P Partnership), 91 F.3d 1072, 1074 (8th Cir.1996). Nevertheless, even after the confirmation of a debtor's plan, "a bankruptcy court may explicitly retain jurisdiction [by stating so in the order confirming the plan] over aspects of a plan related to its administration and interpretation." Id. In this case, the Bankruptcy Court did state in the order confirming Fairfield's plan that it retained jurisdiction over cases involving the enforcement of the plan. The critical question is thus: does this case involve the enforcement of Fairfield's plan?
Fairfield argues that it does, because, according to Fairfield, the property owners' claims were discharged by the confirmation of the plan, and Fairfield is seeking to bar those claims on that basis. The confirmation order, however, discharges only claims against Fairfield that arose before the entry of that order. The plan has nothing whatsoever to do with claims arising after the confirmation date. Accordingly, this case could involve the plan only if the property owners' claims arose before the plan's confirmation. If, on the other hand, the property owners' claims arose postconfirmation, then this case lies outside the scope of the plan, and there is no basis for bankruptcy court jurisdiction. See In re Morgan & Morgan, Inc., 24 B.R. 518, 520-21 (S.D.N.Y.1982), in which the bankruptcy court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Padilla, Bankruptcy No. 04-42708.
...or execution of the plan". In re Craig's Stores of Tex., Inc., 266 F.3d 388 (5th Cir.2001) (citing In re Fairfield Communities, Inc., 142 F.3d 1093, 1095 (8th Cir. 1998)); In re Johns-Manville Corp., 7 F.3d 32, 34 (2d Cir.1993). Enforcing Rule 2016(a) and the Court's order confirming the Pa......
-
In re Cano
...over a discharged debtor with respect to "matters pertaining to the implementation of the plan") (citing In re Fairfield Cmtys. Inc., 142 F.3d 1093, 1095 (8th Cir.1998)); In re Nat'l Gypsum Co., 118 F.3d at 1063; Bradley v. Barnes (In re Bradley), 989 F.2d 802, 804 (5th Cir.1993) (holding t......
-
In re Rodriguez
...over a discharged debtor with respect to "matters pertaining to the implementation of the plan") (citing In re Fairfield Cmtys. Inc., 142 F.3d 1093, 1095 (8th Cir.1991); In re Johns-Manville Corp., 7 F.3d 32, 34 (2d Cir.1993); In re National Gypsum, 118 F.3d 1056, 1063 (5th In National Gyps......
-
In re Pegasus Gold Corp.
...that Defendants have violated their obligations are "related to" the bankruptcy cases. The DEQ relies upon In re Fairfield Communities, Inc., 142 F.3d 1093 (8th Cir.1998), to support its claim that the bankruptcy court has no post-confirmation jurisdiction. However, the confirmation of a pl......