In RE Henry Daniel Zegzula

Filing 14

ORDER AFFIRMING Bankruptcy Court's Dismissal of Zegzula's Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton. (DN) Modified on 11/27/2018 (DN).(cc to Clear Recon, FDIC, JP Morgan, Roosevelt Mgmt, Rushmore Loan)

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8
9
10

In Re:

CASE NO. 18-cv-5517RBL

HENRY ZEGZULA,

BANKRUPTCY CAUSE NO.
18-40874BDL

Debtor,
11

BANKRUPTCY INTERNAL APPEAL
NO. 18-T005

12
13
14

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Debtor Henry Zegula’s Appeal of Bankruptcy

15

Judge Lynch’s Order dismissing his Chapter 7 Bankruptcy filing. Judge Lynch found that

16

Zegzula “is intentionally abusing and unfairly manipulating the bankruptcy system and acting in

17

bad faith in order to fend off foreclosure”:

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

BANKRUPTCY CAUSE NO. - 1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

[Dkt. # 1 at 11; see also Dkt. # 1 at 4].

9
10

Because of the abusive, repetitive filings, Judge Lynch barred Zegzula from filing any
additional bankruptcy cases in this District for five years:

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

[Dkt. # 1 at 12].

18
19
20
21

Zegzula appealed Judge Lynch’s dismissal to this Court [Dkt. # 64 in the Bankruptcy
Case]. He sought to temporarily restrain a pending foreclosure [Dkt. # 11 in this case], which this
Court denied [Dkt. # 13] because the arguments he made did not relate to the appeal before this
Court.

22
23

Zegzula’s Opening Appellate Brief [Dkt. # 10] repeats these arguments: he claims some
of his creditors (and would-be adversaries, though there is no pending litigation or adversary

24

-2

1

proceeding against them) made a host of errors in the way they documented his mortgage and

2

commenced foreclosure proceedings after he defaulted on his loan.
Judge Lynch did not resolve these issues because Zegzula was not entitled to file for

3
4

bankruptcy protection in the first place, based on his prior, serial bankruptcy filings. The only

5

issue before this Court is whether the Bankruptcy Judge’s Order of Dismissal was an abuse of

6

discretion. This Court reviews the bankruptcy court’s findings of facts under the clearly

7

erroneous standard, and its conclusions of law de novo. In re Candland, 90 F.3d 1466, 1469 (9th

8

Cir. 1996). Dismissals are reviewed for abuse of discretion. See In re Marsh, 36 F.3d 825, 828

9

(1994).
The record in this case demonstrates that Judge Lynch’s dismissal was correct, measured

10
11

against either of these standards. Zegzula has filed nine bankruptcy cases in the past ten years.

12

The eight before this one are listed in the Bankruptcy Court’s docket [Dkt. # 1 at 4]:

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Zegzula’s Brief does not address the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling, or the bases for it, at all.

21
22

It instead attacks his creditors’ actions, which are not at issue in this appeal.

23
24

-3

The Bankruptcy Court’s Dismissal of Zegzula’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing as abusive is

1
2

AFFIRMED.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

Dated this 27th day of November, 2018.

5
6

A

7

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

-4