In Re Rene Korper; Conny Korper, Appellants, v. Rene Korper; Conny Korper, Appellees, 122 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 1997)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, BAP No. CC-94-01921-OHB; Lawrence Ollason, Alfred C. Hagan, and Philip H. Brandt, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding.
Before SCHROEDER, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
Creditors Andrea and Geneva Potter appeal pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") affirmance of the bankruptcy court's refusal to deny discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727 to Chapter 7 debtors Rene and Conny Korper. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo a decision of the BAP. See Alsberg v. Robertson (In re Alsberg), 68 F.3d 312, 314 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1568 (1996). We review the bankruptcy court's conclusions of law de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. See id. We affirm.
We conclude that the BAP did not err by affirming the bankruptcy court's findings that the Korpers did not have the fraudulent intent necessary under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a) (2), (a) (4) to deny a discharge, and that their financial records were adequate under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a) (3).
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, the Potters' request for oral argument is denied
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
