Fulmer v. Fifth Third Equipment Finance Co., No. 17-6017 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) affirmed the bankruptcy court's orders dismissing the trustee's complaint and denying leave to file a further amended complaint. The panel held that the ultimate issue presented was whether the finality of an auction sale order, together with statutory provisions and procedural rules, effectively defeated the trustee's claims. The panel held that the bankruptcy court properly dismissed the adversary proceeding; the trustee's allegations in the amended complaint against defendants were inconsistent with the specific findings of the sale order; the findings regarding proper notice, lack of collusion, good faith, fair and reasonable consideration, etc., were all necessary and integral to the bankruptcy court's approval of the sale; the panel rejected the trustee's claim of privity as irrelevant; the trustee's reliance on Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., ___ U.S. ___, 137 S. Ct. 973 (2017), where the Supreme Court held that structured dismissals must follow the same priority rules as required for a Chapter 11 plan confirmation, was misplaced; and whether the trustee liked the specific findings of the sale order or not, they were the detailed findings of the bankruptcy court and were not appealed and thus final. The panel rejected the trustee's remaining claims.
Court Description: Saladino, Author, with Shodeen, Chief Judge, and Sandberg, Bankruptcy Judge] Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. In action by the trustee seeking damages against a variety of defendants for their conduct before and during debtors' Chapter 11 proceeding, including allegations that the defendants concealed agreements and manipulated auction bids in order to deprive the bankruptcy estate of more than $107 million, the finality of the auction sale, along with statutory provisions and procedural rules, effectively defeats the claims; the bankruptcy court's Sale Order's findings regarding proper notice, lack of collusion, good faith, fair dealing and reasonable consideration were all necessary and integral to the court's approval of the sale. [ March 23, 2018
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.