[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 1- 12 30 5

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ D. C. Dock etNo. 2 :0 8- cv -0 02 76 -VEH
MARJ AN VAKILI, and FAITH PROPERTIES, LLC, Pl ai nt iff s- App el la nt s,
ve rs us CHARLES F. STEPHENSON, BROOKESTONE PLACE, LL C, etal., Defen da nt s- App el le es .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Jul y 25 , 20 12 ) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, EDMONDSON, Circ ui t J ud ge , andRESTANI , * Ju dg e.

Honora ble J ane A . Restani, United State Court of International Trade Judg e, sitting by * designation. Case: 11-12305 Date Filed: 07/25/2012 Page: 1 of 3PER CURI AM:

Thi s s ta te -la w di ve rs it y

cas e ari se s o utof t he de fen da nt s’ att em pt s t o c ol le ct de bt s o wedby K ev inVaki li . Plai nt iff s M arjanVaki li (Mr. Vak il i’s wi fe) and Fai th Pro pe rti es su edsev eral de fen da nt s: App el le es Ch arl es F. Ste ph en so n, Pro vi de nc e Pl ace, LLC, an d B ro ok es to ne Pla ce, LLC (“ Defen da nt s” ); a ndtwo
no n- App el le e d efen da nt s. Pl ai nt iff s cl ai m ed , am on g o th er thi ng s, tha t the St ep he ns on Part ie s v io la te d Al ab am a la w by wro ng fu ll y for ecl os in g o n s om e o f th e Vak il is ’ pr op ert ie s. Defe nd an ts cro ss - an d c ou nt ercl ai m ed , all eg in g t ha t Pl ai nt iff s an d M r. Vak il i (wh o h adbe enjoi ne d a s a thi rd -p arty de fen dant , alo ng with S in a Ja sh far, M rs . Vaki li ’s so n) frau du le nt ly tran sf erre d p ro pe rty to a vo id Mr. Vak il i’s cr ed it or s. Afte r di sc ov ery, th e d is tri ctco urt g ran te d Def en da nt s’ m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t an d d is m is se d wi th pre jud ic e al l cl ai m s b ro ug htby Plai nt iff s ag ai ns t Defen da nt s. Th e d is tri ctco urt en te redfin al jud gm en t i n fa vo r of Defen dant s an d ch arg edatt orne y ’s fees an d c os ts to Pla in ti ffs , pl us Mr. Vak il i an d M r. Ja sh far. Fro m a stud y of t he cas e, in cl ud in g the ora l ar gu m en ts m ad e to us , we con cl ud e th atno rev ers ib le erro r ha s b eenpre se nt ed
.

2 Case: 11-12305 Date Filed: 07/25/2012 Page: 2 of 3Pl ai nt iff s an d M r. Vak il i askth e Co urt t o re ve rs e th ree o f th e d is tri ct 1
co urt’s d eci si on s i n t hi s ca se : (1 ) th e g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t fo r Defen da nt s be cau se th e “ un cl eanhand s” do ctrin e b arre d P la in ti ffs fro m see ki ng equi tabl e rel ie f; ( 2) anord er co m

pe ll in g p ro du ct io n o f certa in co m m un ic at io ns be twee n t he Vak il is an d t he ir l awy er; an d (3 ) th e awardun de r th e Alaba m a Lit ig at io n Acco un tabi li ty A ctof a tt orne y ’s fees an d c os ts to Defen da nt s. W e aff irm al l o f th e ap pe al ed -fro m de ci si on s o f th e d is tri ctco urt: th e d is tri ct
co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n b y ap pl y in g t he “un cl eanha nd s” do ctrin e, th e di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n b y co m pe ll in g p ro du ct io n o f th e atto rn ey cl ie ntco m

m un ic at io ns , andth e d is tri ctco urt m ad e n o e rro r in ch arg in g a tt orne y ’s fees an d c os ts to Pla in ti ffs an d t o M r. Vak il i fo r cl ai m s an d d efen se s as se rte d witho utsubs ta nt ia l ju st ifi cat io n. AFFIR MED.

The Notice of Appe al and other documents filed with the Court esta blish that Mr. J ashfa

r 1 did not appeal the district c ourt’s dec isions. 3

Case: 11-12305 Date Filed: 07/25/2012 Page: 3 of 3