U.S. v. Troxler Hosiery Co., Inc., 84-1846

Decision Date04 August 1986
Docket NumberNo. 84-1846,84-1846
Citation796 F.2d 723
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. TROXLER HOSIERY CO., INC., and Gerald S. Schafer, trustee, Appellants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro; Hiram H. Ward, District Judge. (C/A 84-322).

Charles M. Ivey (Ivey, Ivey & Johns, Greensboro, N.C., on brief), for appellants.

John R. Fleder, Office of Consumer Litigation, Civil Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice (Richard K. Willard, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., Kenneth W. McAllister, U.S. Atty., Richard L. Robertson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Greensboro, N.C., David P. Grise, Office of Consumer Litigation, Washington, D.C., on brief), for appellee.

Before WINTER, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Troxler Hosiery Company, Inc., was convicted of criminal contempt 1 and fined $80,000 plus costs 2 for removing previously seized hazardous sleepwear and contracting for its sale in a foreign country and for falsifying company records to conceal its actions. Troxler was given twelve months to pay the fine, but on November 3, 1982, it filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The government filed proof of a secured claim in the amount of the fine and costs, no part of which has been paid. Later, the government filed an adversary proceeding complaint in bankruptcy seeking a declaratory judgment that the automatic stay did not apply to its attempts to collect the criminal fine. In March 1984, the bankruptcy proceeding was converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation.

The bankruptcy court ruled as a matter of law that the automatic stay applied to the government's efforts to collect a contempt fine. On appeal to the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, the order of the bankruptcy court was reversed. The district judge found that the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. Sec. 362 (1982 & Supp. II 1984) did not apply to the collection of the fine and costs for criminal contempt and that such fine survived the bankruptcy.

Troxler appealed, and the government filed a motion to supplement the record on appeal to include portions of depositions of Robert Andrew Troxler, Sr., and Robert Andrew Troxler, Jr. We conclude that the information contained in the supplement is not necessary to a decision in this case, and we deny the motion.

We adopt the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • In re Reasonover
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Virgin Islands, Bankruptcy Division
    • 3 Junio 1999
    ...against the debtor" and points to United States v. Troxler Hosiery Co., Inc., 41 B.R. 457 (M.D.N.C.1984), aff'd per curiam, 796 F.2d 723 (4th Cir.1986) as controlling In Troxler, the corporate debtor was fined $80,000 in a prepetition criminal contempt proceeding. After the debtor filed a c......
  • In re Coulter
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of South Carolina
    • 7 Agosto 2003
    ...action...." Kimberlin v. Dewalt, 12 F.Supp.2d 487, 498 (D.Md.1998), aff'd sub nom., 1998 WL 830834. See also United States v. Troxler Hosiery Co., 796 F.2d 723 (4th Cir.1986), aff'g 41 B.R. 457, 461 (M.D.N.C.1984), (adopting decision of District Court which determined that a criminal senten......
  • In re Valle
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Maryland
    • 17 Junio 2011
    ...proceeding within meaning of § 362(b)(1)); United States v. Troxler Hosiery Co., Inc., 41 B.R. 457, 461 (D.N.C.1984), aff'd, 796 F.2d 723 (4th Cir.1986) (§ 362(b)(1) “makes no distinction between sentences of imprisonment or fines and is broad enough to include enforcement of a judgment thr......
  • In re Bibbs
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • 19 Agosto 2002
    ...of criminal fine and costs imposed on debtor in prepetition criminal proceeding was excepted from stay), United States v. Troxler Hosiery Co., 796 F.2d 723 (4th Cir.1986); 134 Baker Street, Inc. v. Georgia, 47 B.R. 379, 382 (N.D.Ga.1984) (concluding that section 362(b)(1) permits state to e......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Trials
    • United States
    • Georgetown Law Journal No. 110-Annual Review, August 2022
    • 1 Agosto 2022
    ...Co., 681 F.2d 934, 937-38 (4th Cir. 1982) (criminal contempt f‌ine of $80,000 against corporation worth $540,000 not serious), aff’d , 796 F.2d 723 (4th Cir. 1986); U.S. v. Time, 21 F.3d 635, 642 (5th Cir. 1994) (criminal contempt f‌ines under $5,000 not serious); U.S. v. Soderna, 82 F.3d 1......

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