Feingerts v. D'Anna (In re D'Anna), CASE NO. 12–12680
| Decision Date | 01 March 2016 |
| Docket Number | CASE NO. 12–12680,ADVERSARY NO. 15–1018, ADVERSARY NO. 15–1045 |
| Parties | In re: Ronda Wortmann D'Anna, Debtor(s) Bruce L. Feingerts, Plaintiff v. Ronda Wortmann D'Anna, et al, Defendants Bruce L. Feingerts, Plaintiff v. Ronda Wortmann D'Anna, et al, Defendants |
| Court | United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Eastern District of Louisiana |
Jonathan M. Shushan, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff.
Anthony J. Russo, Jr., Seale, Smith, Zuber & Barnette, Baton Rouge, LA, Jack A. Ricci, Jonathan L. Schultis, Ricci Partners, LLC, New Orleans, LA, for Defendants.
Hon. Elizabeth W. Magner
On September 30, 2015, the following matters came before the Court:
Following the trial, the parties requested and were allowed time to file post-trial briefs. After submission of briefs, the Court took the matters under advisement.
The center of this dispute is a contested title to real estate located at 5839 Bellaire Dr., New Orleans, Louisiana ("Bellaire Property"). The Bellaire Property was purportedly purchased by Ronda Wortmann D'Anna ("Debtor" or "D'Anna") from Doris Lavner Feingerts ("Mrs.Feingerts") and the Maurice P. Feingerts Testamentary Trusts ("Trusts").
The Bellaire Property was originally part of the community of acquets and gains between Mrs. Feingerts and her husband, Maurice Feingerts. When Maurice died on July 19, 1967, his will ("Will"), bequeathed his entire estate to his three (3) children, Susan, Bruce, and Jane, in trust but subject to a usufruct in favor of Mrs. Feingerts.5 The Trusts created by the Will would hold the property of his estate until each child reached the age of thirty-one (31).
A Judgment of Possession was rendered on September 19, 1974, naming Mrs. Feingerts as trustee of the children's testamentary trusts.6 It also recognized Mrs. Feingerts as owner of half of the community existing between herself and Maurice along with a usufruct over the other half. The Trusts were recognized as one-third owners of Maurice's half of the community and separate property subject to the usufruct. Thus, the children, as beneficiaries of the Trusts, would ultimately inherit the naked ownership of a one-sixth (1/6) interest in the Bellaire Property.
Mrs. Feingerts listed the Bellaire Property for sale and on April 16, 2009, entered into an agreement to sell it to D'Anna.7 Feingerts was aware that his mother had listed the Bellaire Property for sale, but did not consent to either its listing or sale.
Crescent Title, LLC ("Crescent") and Robert Bergeron were hired to close the sale. In the course and scope of this representation, Paul M. Lapeyre ("Lapeyre"), an attorney with Crescent, researched the Bellaire Property's title. In connection with his inquiry, Lapeyre found an Orleans Parish property tax bill that listed the property owner as "FEINGERTS DORIS L ETALS," the Will, the Judgment of Possession, a release of Mrs. Feingerts as tutor for Rushing, and a cancellation of a "Minor's Mortgage" that had been executed by Rushing in favor of Mrs. Feingerts. These documents were attached to a Title Commitment Authorization ("Title Commitment") issued in favor of D'Anna.8 Following the closing, Fidelity issued a Homeowner's Policy of Title Insurance to D'Anna ("Title Policy").9
The Will gave Mrs. Feingerts, as trustee, the "[P]ower to buy and sell and convey property for and on behalf of the trust ..." However, by the time Mrs. Feingerts listed and agreed to sell the Bellaire Property, all three (3) Feingerts children had reached the age of thirty-one (31). Nevertheless, on July 30, 2009, Mrs. Feingerts, individually and as trustee of the Trusts, transferred the Bellaire Property to D'Anna by Cash Sale for the purchase price of $127,000 ("Sale").10
D'Anna financed the purchase with a loan from Gulf Coast Bank and Trust Company ("Gulf Coast"). The loan is represented by a a promissory note dated July 30, 2009, executed by D'Anna in favor of Gulf Coast ("Note") and secured by a mortgage encumbering the Bellaire Property ("Mortgage").11 Subsequent to the Sale, Gulf Coast transferred the Note and Mortgage to Bank of America, N.A ("BOA"). D'Anna stopped making payments on the Note in February 2014. BOA maintains that it was due $156,439.03 as of October 28, 2015.12
Mrs. Feingerts died in December 2011. A Succession was opened ("Succession"), and Rushing was appointed her succession representative.
On July 30, 2012, Feingerts filed a Petition for Recognition as Owner of Immovable Property against D'Anna in Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans ("State Case").13 Feingerts alleges that he inherited a one-sixth (1/6) interest in the Bellaire Property from his father, and his mother attempted to sell it to D'Anna without his consent or authority. Feingerts' siblings, Rushing and Hackmeier, have not challenged the Sale by their mother to D'Anna.
In response, D'Anna filed third party demands against the Trusts and the Succession. The Succession filed third party demands against Fidelity and Crescent, but it later dismissed its Complaint against Fidelity.
Hackmeier and Rushing were joined as defendants to the State Case. D'Anna filed cross-claims against Hackmeier and Rushing. Jacques P. Bezou, Stacy R. Palowsky, and the Bezou Law Firm, previous counsel to Feingerts, also intervened in the State Case alleging an attorney's lien over any recovery by Feingerts for unpaid legal fees.
On September 10, 2012, D'Anna filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code.14
On April 5, 2013, Feingerts filed a Motion to Traverse the Estimative and Descriptive List of Assets and Liabilities in the Succession.15 The State Court entered a Judgment on October 25, 2013, finding no error with the descriptive list.16 Feingerts appealed this ruling to the Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal which affirmed in favor of the Succession.17 Feingerts' Application for Writ of Certiorari to the Louisiana Supreme Court was denied.
On March 2, 2015, Feingerts filed an adversary proceeding against D'Anna which was assigned case number 15–1018. The Adversary Complaint alleged and restated the facts and relief requested in the State Case. With her Answer, D'Anna filed a third party demand against Fidelity.18
On March 10, 2015, D'Anna removed the State Case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The District Court referred the case to the Bankruptcy Court, and it was assigned adversary number 15–1045.
On September 29, 2015, this Court approved a settlement among D'Anna, Rushing, and Hackmeier which included the execution of quitclaim deeds transferring any interests that Rushing or Hackmeier had in the Bellaire Property to D'Anna as well as ratification of the Sale.19
Feingerts contends that he is a one-sixth (1/6) owner of the Bellaire Property. D'Anna claims that Mrs. Feingerts had authority to sell the Bellaire Property to her, and thus, she is its full owner. Mrs. Feingerts' Succession, Fidelity, and Crescent concur. In the alternative, and in the event that the Court finds Feingerts to be a one-sixth (1/6) owner of the Bellaire Property, D'Anna asserts that Mrs. Feingerts breached the warranty of eviction and seeks damages against the Succession and reimbursement under the Title Policy with Fidelity.
Once a bankruptcy is filed, the federal courts, specifically the bankruptcy court, obtain jurisdiction over any claims against the debtor or property of the estate.20 Claims by nondebtors against nondebtor parties are generally outside of the federal jurisdiction created by 28 U.S.C. §§ 157
and 1334, but under 28 U.S.C. § 1334, a federal court, including a bankruptcy court, may assert federal jurisdiction over any claims that "arise in" or are "related to" a bankruptcy.21
"Related to" jurisdiction turns on whether the outcome of a proceeding could conceivably have an effect on a debtor's estate.22 Although this characterization of jurisdiction appears boundless, in truth a bankruptcy court's jurisdiction, while broad, is not limitless.23 In analyzing "related to" jurisdiction, courts must be careful not to expand the whole in a universe where every action or claim is related to every other.
This Court has jurisdiction over any claims against D'Anna. This includes Feingerts' claim challenging her ownership of the Bellaire Property.24 As to the claim by D'Anna against Fidelity, Crescent, and the Succession (collectively "Defendants"), Defendants have affirmatively consented to the jurisdiction of this Court. Because the claims by D'Anna against each of the foregoing are both property of the estate and related to the bankruptcy case, the Court can and will exercise jurisdiction over them. As to the claims presented by Feingerts, the Succession, Fidelity, Bergeron, Crescent, or Bank of America against each other, the Court lacks jurisdiction or constitutional authority.25 As a result, their issues have not been considered but, instead, are preserved by the parties for later determination by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Cross Motions for Summary Judgment came before the Court along with trial on the merits of the Complaints. Summary Judgment is proper when no genuine issues of material fact exist, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.26 In considering a motion for summary judgment, the court must view the evidence introduced and all factual inferences in a light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.27 The movant bears the burden of proving "absence of genuine issue of material fact."2...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- In re Cole
-
Fallon Family, L.P. v. Goodrich Petroleum Corp. (In re Goodrich Petroleum Corp.)
...from being stripped of the Lease Ratification even were the record silent as to the purchase price being paid. See In re D’Anna , 548 B.R. 155, 167–68 (E.D. La. 2016) ("Third persons are not allowed to rely on what is contained in the public records but can instead rely on the absence from ......
-
Dorries v. Linder, 51,070-CA
...the immovable property is located.The statute became effective August 1, 2015. The only reported decision addressing it is In re D'Anna, 548 B.R. 155 (Bankr. E.D. La. 2016). In that case, the bankruptcy court held that the statute was not retroactive. 12. We cannot help but note that even t......
-
Dorries v. Linder
...the immovable property is located.The statute became effective August 1, 2015. The only reported decision addressing it is In re D'Anna, 548 B.R. 155 (Bankr. E.D. La. 2016). In that case, the bankruptcy court held that the statute was not retroactive.12 We cannot help but note that even the......
-
Stern Claims and Article Iii Adjudication—the Bankruptcy Judge Knows Best?
...2017); Waldron v. FDIC (In re Venture Fin. Grp., Inc.), 558 B.R. 386, 397 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 2016); Feingerts v. D'Anna (In re D'Anna), 548 B.R. 155, 164 n.24 (Bankr. E.D. La. 2016) ; Specialty Labs., Inc. v. Advanced Biomedical, Inc. (In re Advanced Biomedical, Inc.), 547 B.R. 337, 339 (Ba......