By: Derek Hawkins//July 28, 2015//
Bankruptcy
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, ROVNER, Circuit Judge, and SPRINGMANN, District Judge.
Abuse of Discretion – Civil Contempt
No. 14-3017 Charles E. Taylor v. Patricia Caiarelli
Appellant Charles E. Taylor appeals district court decision arguing that court erred (1) by refusing to dismiss the appeal as moot; (2) by determining that a ratification order did not violate the statutory discharge and/or plan injunctions; and (3) by determining that a ratification order did not constitute an impermissible collateral attack on a federal judgment.
“Taylor counters that the bankruptcy court’s dismissal order which led to the discharge injunction, was not before the district court on appeal. The discharge injunction remains in place, Taylor argues, with or without a ruling on the orders challenged on appeal. While true, Taylor’s argument ignores the Appellees’ interest in safely returning to the probate court to ratify the assignment. The contempt order, which was before the district court on appeal, rendered the ratification order void ab initio. For the ratification order to be reentered, the Appellees must file a motion for reentry in the probate court.3 And with the discharge injunction in place, any such return to the probate court would risk a repeat violation, and a repeat finding of civil contempt. Thus, so long as the discharge injunction remains in place, the purported settlement provides only partial relief, and the underlying dispute to which the challenged orders arose remains unresolved. See Chafin, 133 S. Ct. at 1023 (a case is moot “only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).”
Affirmed.