Rosbottom v. Schiff et al
| Harold L Rosbottom, Jr |
| Gerald H Schiff and Leslie B Fox |
| 5:2015cv00758 |
| March 20, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana |
| Shreveport Office |
| Caddo |
| Elizabeth E Foote |
| Mark L Hornsby |
| Appeal |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 0158 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
25
ORDER denying 20 Motion for Rehearing Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8022 re 19 Memorandum Ruling. Signed by Judge Elizabeth E Foote on 9/1/2016. (crt,Keifer, K)
|
|
Filing
19
MEMORANDUM RULING: Before the Court is an appeal of two rulings in a bankruptcy adversary proceeding by the debtor and defendant below, Harold Rosbottom Jr re 1 Bankruptcy Appeal. The plaintiffs in the adversary proceeding, Gerald Schiff and Lesl ie Fox, sought a declaration that a condominium held in trust is part of Rosbottom's bankruptcy estate because the trust was not validly formed and therefore never existed. The bankruptcy court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary jud gment and denied Rosbottom's 12(b)(7) motion to dismiss. For the foregoing reasons, the Court REVERSES the bankruptcy court's grant of summary judgment, AFFIRMS its denial of 12(b)(7) dismissal, and REMANDS the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Signed by Judge Elizabeth E Foote on 6/28/2016. (crt,Putch, A)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Louisiana Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
