Mantiply v. Horne et al
Filing
73
ORDER denying 69 Motion for Attorney Fees; terminating 71 Motion. Signed by Senior Judge Charles R. Butler, Jr on 4/8/2014. (adk)
IN
THE
UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
COURT
FOR
THE
SOUTHERN
DISTRICT
OF
ALABAMA
SOUTHERN
DIVISION
In
Re:
)
)
RICHARD
D.
HORNE
and
)
PATRICIA
NELSON
HORNE,
)
)
Debtors,
)
)
MARY
BETH
MANTIPLY,
)
)
CIVIL
ACTION
NO.
13-‐00258-‐CB-‐B
Plaintiff/Appellant,
)
)
v.
)
)
RICHARD
D.
HORNE
and
)
PATRICIA
NELSON
HORNE,
)
)
Defendants/Appellees.
)
ORDER
Appellees
have
filed
a
motion
for
award
of
additional
attorneys’
fees
in
connection
with
the
second
of
two
appeals.
(Doc.
69.)
Appellant
has
filed
an
objection
to
the
motion.
By
separate
opinion
entered
this
date,
this
Court
has
once
again
affirmed
the
decision
of
the
bankruptcy
court.
However,
Appellees
are
not
entitled
to
recover
attorneys’
fees
incurred
in
the
second
appeal.
In
support
of
their
motion,
Appellees
argue
that
“[a]ppellate
attorneys’
fees
and
costs
are
recoverable
herein
under
this
Court’s
order
of
October
28,
2013
(Doc.
36),
adopting
the
holding
of
Parker
v.
Pioneer
Credit
Co.
of
Ala.
(In
re
Parker),
419
B.R.
474,
476
(M.D.
Ala.
2009),
that
appellate
attorneys’
fees
constitute
continuing
mandatory
damages
in
the
appeal
of
the
Bankruptcy
Court
herein.”
(Appellees’
Mot.
¶
1.)
To
be
clear,
that
order
held
that
attorneys’
fees
were
mandatory
and
recoverable
on
appeal
under
11
U.S.C.
§
362(k)
and
Parker
for
violation
of
the
automatic
stay.1
The
second
appeal
(for
which
Appellees
now
seek
additional
attorneys’
fees)
involves
violation
of
the
discharge
injunction.2
Neither
Parker
nor
the
Court’s
prior
order
authorizes
recovery
of
attorneys’
fees
incurred
on
appeal
of
sanctions
for
violation
of
the
discharge
injunction.
The
motion
is,
therefore,
DENIED.
DONE
and
ORDERED
this
the
8th
day
of
April,
2014.
s/Charles
R.
Butler,
Jr.
Senior
United
States
District
Judge
1
The
first
appeal
involved
violations
of
both
the
automatic
stay
and
the
discharge
injunction.
2
See
Opinion
of
April
8,
2014,
at
13.
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?