Motions to reopen
It was not an abuse of discretion for a bankruptcy court to refuse to reopen a case four years after it closed.
“As the bankruptcy court noted here, Redmond’s delay ‘dwarfs’ the two-year delay in Bianucci. Redmond received the payoff letters at the root of this dispute in 1998, and he proceeded to litigate the matter for seven years in state court. In 2005, three weeks before trial in state court and four years after the case had been closed, Redmond finally moved to reopen his bankruptcy case. The timing of the motion strongly suggests that it was a stalling tactic to delay the state-court foreclosure proceeding. By 2005 the judge who had presided over the bankruptcy case had retired, and the records had been archived. In the meantime Pinnacle had incurred costs in the state-court proceeding-the exact ground for prejudice in Bianucci.”
08-4288 Redmond v. Fifth Third Bank
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Manning, J., Sykes, J.