Gideon

Filing 7

ORDER Affirming August 4, 2016, Order of the Bankruptcy Court (Dkt. #64). Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
THOMAS J. BUDZYNSKI,
Appellant,

Case No. 16-cv-12983
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
MARK SHAPIRO,
Appellee.
_______________________________/
ORDER AFFIRMING AUGUST 4, 2016, ORDER
OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT (DKT. # 64)
This is a puzzling bankruptcy appeal. The appeal arises out of the Chapter 7
bankruptcy of Debtor Larry Gideon (“Gideon”). Appellant Thomas J. Budzynski
(“Budzynski”) appeared in Gideon’s bankruptcy proceedings as a creditor of
Gideon. During those proceedings, a motion was filed to abandon certain real
property owned by Gideon (the “Property”) (and encumbered by certain liens) (the
“Abandonment Motion”). (See Bank. Dkt. #43.)

Appellee Mark H. Shapiro

(“Shapiro”), the Trustee for Gideon’s bankruptcy estate, opposed the
Abandonment Motion (see Bank. Dkt. #45), and the Bankruptcy Court ultimately
denied the motion (see Bank Dkt. #54).
Budzynski thereafter filed a motion in the Bankruptcy Court for authority to
file a lawsuit against Shapiro (the “Motion for Authority”). (See Bank Dkt. #61.)

In the Motion for Authority, Budzysnki maintained that Shapiro wrongfully
“refused to abandon the [P]roperty” and should be held to account for damages
caused by that wrongful conduct. (Id. at 3.) On August 4, 2016, the Bankruptcy
Court denied the Motion for Authority on the ground that authority was
unnecessary. (See Bank. Dkt. #64.) The Bankruptcy Court explained that (1) it
was the only forum in which Budzynski could sue Shapiro and (2) Budzynski did
not need permission to file such a suit. (See id.)
Budzynski was apparently unwilling to take “yes” for an answer. Instead of
filing suit against Shapiro in the Bankruptcy Court as that court said he could do,
Budzynski filed an appeal in this Court challenging the Bankruptcy Court’s denial
of the Motion for Authority. (See ECF #1.1) In his appeal, Budzynski asks the
Court to “allow suit against” Shapiro. (ECF #5 at 9, Pg. ID 82.) That request for
relief is difficult to understand given that the Bankruptcy Court has already said
that he may sue Shapiro.
Budzynski also asks this Court to hold “that suit against [Shapiro] is not
required to be brought in bankruptcy court.” (ECF #5 at 9, Pg. ID 82.) But he cites
no authority for that proposition. Simply put, he has failed to show any error in the

1

Budzynski did not appeal the Bankruptcy Court’s Order denying the
Abandonment Motion. (See Notice of Appeal, ECF #1.)

Bankruptcy Court’s determination that he must sue Shapiro, if at all, only in the
Bankruptcy Court.
The issues raised on appeal by Budzynski lack merit. Accordingly, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that the August 4, 2016, Bankruptcy Court Order Denying
Creditor Thomas J. Budzynski’s Motion for Authority to Sue Trustee (Bank Dkt.
#64) is AFFIRMED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: November 16, 2016

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on November 16, 2016, by electronic means
and/or ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]