Baer v. Daley et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by District Judge Julie A. Robinson on 7/24/2012.Mailed to pro se party Bradford Daley, 51 Lee Road 987, Phenix City, AL 36870 by regular mail. (pp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
BRADFORD LAMAR DALEY, et al.,
ROBERT L. BAER, Trustee,
Case No. 12-4086-JAR
Adversary Proceeding No. 11-07028
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) of United
States Bankruptcy Judge Janice Miller Karlin regarding Plaintiff Robert L. Baer, Trustee’s
motion for default judgment on his complaint against Defendant Bradford Daley, aka Brad
Daley, Bradford L. Daley and Bradford Lamar Daley. Defendant is not represented by counsel
and the Report and Recommendation was mailed to him at his last known address on July 7,
2012. In reviewing a bankruptcy judge’s proposed findings and conclusions in a non-core
proceeding, this Court conducts a de novo review “of any portion of the bankruptcy judge’s
findings of fact or conclusions of law to which any specific written objection has been made. . .
.”1 No objections to Bankruptcy Judge Karlin’s Report and Recommendation have been filed,
and the time for doing so has expired.2 Accordingly, the Court will adopt the Report and
Recommendation and grant the Trustee’s motion for default judgment.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that:
The findings and conclusions contained in Bankruptcy Judge Karlin’s Report and
Fed. R. Bktrcy Proc. 9033(d); see also 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1).
See Fed. R. Bktrcy. Proc. 9033(b). Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on or before
July 19, 2012.
Recommendation (Doc. 6) are adopted as the opinion of the Court;
For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Trustee’s motion
for default judgment (Adv. Pro. Doc. 56) against Defendant Bradford L. Daley is
Judgment is entered against Defendant Bradford L. Daley in favor of the Trustee
for the following:
Damages of $2,930.00 pursuant to K.S.A. § 50-1133(a);
Punitive damages of $29,300.00 pursuant to K.S.A. § 501133(b) and the common law;
Penalties of $20,000.00 pursuant to K.S.A. § 50-634(b),
and K.S.A. § 50-634(b) and K.S.A. § 50-636(a) and (d);
Attorney fees and expenses of $1,490.27 pursuant to
K.S.A. § 50-1133(a) and K.S.A. § 50-634(e);
The costs of this action pursuant to K.S.A. § 50-1133(a);
Declaratory judgment that the Defendant’s acts violated the
Kansas Credit Services Organization Act and the Kansas
Consumer Protection Act pursuant to K.S.A. § 50634(a)(1), and an injunction against future violations
pursuant to K.S.A. § 50-634(a)(2); and
Declaratory judgment that because the Defendant’s written
agreements with the Joneses (debtors) are in violation of
the Kansas Credit Services Organizations Act and the
Kansas Consumer Protection Act, the contracts are
therefore void and unenforceable in their entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 24, 2012
S/ Julie A. Robinson
JULIE A. ROBINSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.