TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Pearson

In Re Frank Pearson, Vevelyn Pearson, Debtors

In re Pearson, 108 B.R. 804 (Bankr. S.D. Florida 1989)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Bankruptcy Courts
Decided
October 20, 1989
Docket
No. 18-26047
Judges
A. Jay Cristol
Citations
108 B.R. 804

Opinion — Cristol

ORDER DIRECTING RETURN OF FEE TO DEBTOR A. JAY CRISTOL, Bankruptcy Judge.

This cause came on to be heard on July 11, 1989 on an order to show cause. The court heard argument of the trustee and argument of Richard Stanton, including his request to file papers in support of his position. The court ruled on the record and the ruling was memorialized by order dated July 31, 1989. That ruling and order directed Richard Stanton to file a memorandum of law in support of his right to retain any or all of the fees paid to him by debtors in this case. The court allowed until August 10, 1989 for this filing. Richard Stanton has failed to file such memorandum or any other pleading. No showing has been made to establish that the fee has been earned. Substantial indications are in the record which establish that it has not been earned. The original motion of the trustee which was the genesis for the order to show cause stands unopposed. The court has waited patiently for over two months for Mr. Stanton’s memorandum. No memorandum has been received, nor has there been a request for additional time to respond. The court being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Richard Stanton is ORDERED to immediately turn over the sum of $400 representing the attorney’s fee paid to him by debtors in the above-styled case to Frank and Vevelyn Pearson and send proof of same to the court and the trustee.

2. Richard Stanton is enjoined from practicing law before this United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida until such time as he files a certificate with the court certifying that he has completed nine hours of Florida Bar approved Continuing Legal Education in the area of Bankruptcy and three hours of Continuing Legal Education in the area of Legal Ethics.

DONE and ORDERED.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1990: 11994: 11996: 12007: 119902026peak 1990 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Maurice167 B.R. 114 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1994)
  2. In re Ebel371 B.R. 866 (Bankr. S.D. Ill. 2007)
  3. In re Assaf119 B.R. 465 (E.D. Pa. 1990)
  4. In re Pocono Truck Wash, Inc.206 B.R. 352 (Bankr. M.D. Penn. 1996)

Most recent

  1. In re Ebel371 B.R. 866 (Bankr. S.D. Ill. 2007)
  2. In re Pocono Truck Wash, Inc.206 B.R. 352 (Bankr. M.D. Penn. 1996)
  3. In re Maurice167 B.R. 114 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1994)
  4. In re Assaf119 B.R. 465 (E.D. Pa. 1990)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list