The Cadle Company v. Stewart ( 2002 )

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
MAY 23 2002
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
In re: RODDY MAC STEWART and
DEBORAH B. STEWART, also
known as Debbie Stewart, also known
as Debbie B. Stewart,
No. 01-3229
Debtors, (BAP No. KS-00-067)
(Appeal from BAP)
_______________________________
THE CADLE COMPANY,
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
RODDY MAC STEWART and
DEBORAH B. STEWART,
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR , PORFILIO , and BALDOCK , Circuit Judges.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Appellant The Cadle Company appeals from an order of the Bankruptcy
Appellate Panel (BAP) of the Tenth Circuit affirming the district court’s order
that, in turn, affirmed the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Kansas’s judgment
granted in favor of appellees Roddy Mac and Deborah B. Stewart. Our
jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d), and we affirm.
The BAP opinion fully sets out the relevant facts and issues raised in this
appeal and we need not repeat them here. See The Cadle Co. v. Stewart (In re
Stewart) , 263 B.R. 608 (10th Cir. BAP 2001). On appeal from either a district
court’s decision in its capacity as a bankruptcy appellate court or a BAP’s opinion
affirming the district court, we independently review the bankruptcy court’s
decision, applying a “clearly erroneous” standard to the bankruptcy court’s
findings of fact and a “de novo” standard to its conclusions of law. Phillips v.
White (In re White) , 25 F.3d 931, 933 (10th Cir. 1994) (appeal from district
court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court); In re Albrecht , 233 F.3d 1258, 1260
(10th Cir. 2000) (appeal from BAP’s opinion). The parties did not question the
applicable law below.
-2-
We have carefully considered the record, the applicable law, and the
arguments of the parties. For substantially the same reasons stated in the BAP
opinion filed June 20, 2001, we conclude that the bankruptcy court’s findings of
fact are not clearly erroneous. The appellees’ request for attorney fees and costs
on appeal is DENIED.
The judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel is
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
Bobby R. Baldock
Circuit Judge
-3-