In re: Level Propane Gases, et al, No. 10-8022 (6th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

By order of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, the precedential effect of this decision is limited to the case and parties pursuant to 6th Cir. BAP LBR 8013-1(b). See also 6th Cir. BAP LBR 80101(c). File Name: 10b0010n.06 BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE SIXTH CIRCUIT In re: Level Propane Gases, Inc. et al., Debtors. _____________________________________ William H. Maloof, Appellant, v. Mark Uhrich, Plan Administrator of the Consolidated Estate of Level Propane Gases, Inc. Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 10-8022 Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio Case No. 02-16172 Decided and Filed: November 16, 2010 Before: BOSWELL, McIVOR, and RHODES, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judges. ____________________ COUNSEL ON BRIEF: David C. Eisler, Medina, Ohio, for Appellant. Mark A. Phillips, BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee. ____________________ OPINION ____________________ MARCI B. McIVOR, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge. William H. Maloof ( Debtor ) appeals the bankruptcy court s order dismissing his Complaint to Revoke Confirmation of the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Plan, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1144, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and the bankruptcy court s denial of Debtor s motion for leave to file a third amended complaint. Upon examination, the Panel unanimously agrees that the facts and legal arguments presented in the briefs and record, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(j)(2)(c), Rules of the Sixth Circuit; 6th Cir. BAP LBR 8012. The Panel also concludes that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the bankruptcy court s orders dismissing the Debtor s complaint and denying the Debtor s motion for leave to file a third amended complaint. Accordingly, for the reasons stated by the bankruptcy court in its opinion entered on March 30, 2010, the Panel affirms the bankruptcy court s orders dismissing the Debtor s complaint and denying the Debtor s motion for leave to file a third amended complaint.

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.