Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03254/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03254-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

In re CARROLL RICHARD OLSON, } 

and MONA MELVA OLSON, doing } 

business as Olson Farms, } 

formerly doing business as } 

Olson Fur Company, Inc., } 

formerly doing business as } 

Western Fur Company, Inc., } 

} 

Debtors. } 

} 

________________ } 

} 

CARROLL RICHARD OLSON, } 

and MONA MELVA OLSON, } 

} 

Defendants-Appellants, } 

} 

FI 1 

U . .. ' f:1 -- . mted St~tn ~,c of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

MAA ~ 5 f990 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. } 

} 

No. 89-3254 

(D. Kansas) 

CHANUTE PRODUCTION CREDIT } (D.C. No. 88-4215-R} 

ASSOCIATION, WILLIAM D. } 

COOMBS, KAREN PADDOCK, and } 

HAROLD COLEMAN, } 

} 

Plaintiffs-Appellees. } 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MCKAY, SEYMOUR, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-3254 Document: 01019966021 Date Filed: 03/05/1990 Page: 1 
• 

34(a}; 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. Therefore, the case is ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Appellants Carroll Richard Olson and Mona Melva Olson appeal 

from the district court's September 11, 1989 order affirming the 

bankruptcy court's order denying appellants' motion for sanctions 

against appellees Chanute Production Credit Association, William 

D. Coombs, Karen Paddock and Harold Coleman. Appellants argue 

that Chanute PCA violated the bankruptcy court's previous stay 

order when it caused the issuance of a general execution of an in 

rem Kansas state court judgment relating to certain property 

belonging to appellants. Appellants also argue that there were 

improper ex parte communications with one of the judges below. 

The actions of Chanute PCA and its counsel may have resulted 

in a technical violation of the stay order. However, because 

appellants suffered no harm as a result of any violation that may 

have occurred, we agree with both the district court and the 

bankruptcy court that sanctions were not appropriate. We also 

find no basis for appellants' allegations of improper ex parte 

communications. 

Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court's September 11, 1989 

judgment affirming the bankruptcy court's denial of appellant's 

request for sanctions. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court 

David M. Ebel 

Circuit Judge 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-3254 Document: 01019966021 Date Filed: 03/05/1990 Page: 2