Northland National Bank v. David Lindsey, No. 11-1538 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Bankruptcy. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel decision affirming bankruptcy court's decision denying Northland's objections to debtor's discharge affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-1538 ___________ In re: David P. Lindsey, Debtor, --------------------------------Northland National Bank, Appellant, v. David P. Lindsey, Appellee. * * * * * * * * * Appeal from the United States * Bankruptcy Appellate Panel * for the Eighth Circuit. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: September 26, 2011 Filed: September 29, 2011 ___________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this adversary proceeding brought pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B), Northland National Bank (Northland) appeals from the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) affirming the bankruptcy court s1 judgment denying 1 The Honorable Jerry W. Venters, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Northland s objection to debtor David Lindsey s discharge in bankruptcy. Having reviewed the bankruptcy court s factual findings for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo, we agree with the BAP that the bankruptcy court s findings were supported by the record and were not clearly erroneous. See In re Vote, 276 F.3d 1024, 1026 (8th Cir. 2002) (standards of review); see also 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B) (discharge under provisions of bankruptcy code does not discharge individual debtor from debt to extent obtained by use of statement in writing that is (i) materially false; (ii) respecting debtor s financial condition; (iii) on which creditor to whom debtor is liable reasonably relied; and (iv) that debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive); First Nat l Bank of Olathe v. Pontow, 111 F.3d 604, 608 (8th Cir. 1997) (to bar discharge under § 523(a)(2)(B), creditor must prove each statutory element by preponderance of evidence). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
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.
