Raymond Kelley, et al v. Centennial Bank
Filing
PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Pasco M. Bowman and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4091121] [13-1491]
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-1491
___________________________
In re: Raymond Kelley; Karen Patrice Kelley
lllllllllllllllllllllDebtors
-----------------------------Raymond Kelley; Karen Patrice Kelley
lllllllllllllllllllllAppellants
v.
Centennial Bank
lllllllllllllllllllllAppellee
____________
Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy
Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit
____________
Submitted: October 22, 2013
Filed: October 31, 2013
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Appellate Case: 13-1491
Page: 1
Date Filed: 10/31/2013 Entry ID: 4091121
Raymond and Karen Kelley (the Kelleys) appeal the decision of the Bankruptcy
Appellate Panel (BAP) affirming the bankruptcy court’s1 order requiring the Kelleys
to convey certain parcels of real property to Centennial Bank, pursuant to the Kelleys’
confirmed plan. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on
appeal, we agree with the BAP’s conclusions and find no basis to set aside the
bankruptcy court’s order. See In re Ungar, 633 F.3d 675, 678-79 (8th Cir. 2011) (this
court applies same standards as BAP, reviewing bankruptcy court’s factual findings
for clear error, and its legal determinations de novo); In re Dial Bus. Forms, Inc., 341
F.3d 738, 744 (8th Cir. 2003) (bankruptcy court’s interpretation of confirmed plan is
reviewed for abuse of discretion).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Audrey R. Evans, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the
Eastern District of Arkansas.
-2-
Appellate Case: 13-1491
Page: 2
Date Filed: 10/31/2013 Entry ID: 4091121
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.
Why Is My Information Online?