In re: Cobrans Corp ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    For the Fifth Circuit
    No. 00-20219
    Summary Calendar
    In The Matter Of: COBRANS CORPORATION
    Debtor
    _______________________________________________
    COBRANS CORPORATION,
    Appellee,
    VERSUS
    CAPT. KIRK’S MARINE SERVICE INC.,
    Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    For the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division
    (H-99-CV-2806)
    January 8, 2001
    Before JOLLY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Appellant Capt. Kirk’s Marine Service, Incorporated (“Capt.
    Kirk’s”), appeals the district court’s order affirming a bankruptcy
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
    the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 00-20219
    --2--
    court’s     judgment   in     favor   of    Appellee     Cobrans   Corporation
    (“Cobrans”).    We affirm.
    “We review the findings of the bankruptcy court just as we
    would findings from a trial in the district court,” and “we will
    not overturn findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous.”
    In re Killough, 
    900 F.2d 61
    , 63 (5th Cir. 1990) (internal citations
    omitted).    “A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when, although
    there is enough evidence to support it, the reviewing court is left
    with a firm and definite conviction that a mistake has been
    committed.”      In    re   Christopher,     
    28 F.3d 512
    ,   514   (5th   Cir.
    1994)(citing United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 
    33 U.S. 364
    (1948)).    “Moreover, we must give due regard to the opportunity of
    the bankruptcy court to judge the credibility of witnesses.”                 In re
    Coston, 
    991 F.2d 257
    , 262 (5th Cir. 1993); see also Federal Rule of
    Bankruptcy Procedure 8013.
    Although    we    find    that   the   bankruptcy     court   abused     its
    discretion in admitting certain invoices that were inadmissible
    hearsay and not qualified under the business records exception, see
    Federal Rules of Evidence 801, 803(6), we nevertheless do not find
    that the bankruptcy court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous.
    “If the lower court’s account of the evidence is plausible in light
    of the record viewed in its entirety, the court of appeals may not
    reverse it even though convinced that, had it been sitting as the
    trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” In
    No. 00-20219
    --3--
    re 
    Christopher, 28 F.3d at 514-15
    (citing Anderson v. City of
    Bessemer City,   
    470 U.S. 564
    ,   573-74   (1985)).   The   evidence,
    including the letter from Capt. Kirk’s dated September 15, 1997,
    and the business records from 1994-1996, is sufficient to support
    the judgment of the bankruptcy court.     See Southern Pacific Trans.
    Co. v. Chabert, 
    973 F.2d 441
    , 448 (5th Cir. 1992).
    Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
    AFFIRMED.