United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-2184

___________ In re: Robert G. Zepecki * * Debtor, * *

------------------- * * Robert G. Zepecki, * * Appeal from the United States Petitioner-Appellant, * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. v. * * [UNPUBLISHED] Bonnie L. Harlan; * * Respondent-Appellee, * * David D. Coop, * * Trustee-Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: March 6, 1998 Filed: March 30, 1998

___________ Before McMILLIAN, BEAM, an d MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for th e 1 Eastern District of Arkansas. The Honorable James G. Mixon, Chief Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court 2 for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2- Robert G. Zepecki appeals from the district court & s affirmance of the bankruptcy 1 court & s grant of Bonnie L. Harlan & s motion to convert Zepecki & s Chapter 13 proceeding 2 to a Chapter 7 proceeding. We affirm.
Zepecki commenced a voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, which h e successfully converted to a Chapter 13 pro ceeding. Harlan, Zepecki & s ex-wife, moved to convert her ex-husband & s Chapter 13 proceeding back to a Chapter 7 proceeding, on the ground that Zepecki had attempted to hide a real es tate transaction and the disposal of its proceeds during a Chapter 7 meeting of creditors. Following a hearing, at which Ze pecki testified, the bankruptcy court found that Zepecki & s conduct warrante d conversion of his proceeding, and gra nted the motion. On appeal, Zepecki argues that the bankruptcy court & s finding s of fact and conclusions of law were so vague that they failedto comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a) and, alternatively, that the bankruptc y court & s findings of fact were clearly erroneous.
We conclude Zepecki & s argument that the bankruptcy court & s find ings of fact and concl usions of law fail to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a) is without merit. Se e Bankruptcy Rule 7052; Newton County Wildlife Ass & n v. United States Forest Service , 113 F.3d 110, 114 n.5 (8th Cir. 1997), cert. denied , 66 U.S.L.W. 3355 (U.S. Feb. 23, 1998) (No. 97-774).

We also conclude the bankruptcy court & s determination that Zepecki filed hi s bankruptcypetition in bad faith is not clearly erroneous. See Wegner v. Grunewaldt , 821 F.2d 1317, 1320 (8th Cir. 1987) (standard of review). Within ten weeks before-3-

fil ing his bankruptcy petition, Zepecki transferred to an Alabama attorne y $102,989. 17, representing the proceeds of the sale of real estate he owned in Illinois. This transfer occurred within a month after Zepecki & s ex-wife obtained a divorc e judgment for one-half of the amount of debt reduction on the property. Zepecki admitted he did not list the proceeds o f the sale or the transfer, but instead represented that a corporation he owned had completed the real estate transaction. He testified that, at the time h e filed the petition, the sale proceeds had gone toward an intende d purchase of another property. The bankruptcy court stated it disbelieved Zepecki & s testimo nyconcerning the proceeds, and noting the proximity between the divorc e decree, t he transfer, and Zepecki & s bankruptcy filing, concluded Zepecki had “shown
ev ery indication of dealing dishonestly with his creditors.” Those determination s support a fi nding of bad faith warranting conversion. See In re Molitor , 76 F.3d 218, 221 (8th Cir . 1996) (affirming bankruptcy court & s finding of bad faith where it wa s “un disputed at the motion hearing that [debtor] misrepresented both his tax liabilities andhis monthly rent expenses on his schedules”); cf. In re Smith , 848 F.2d 813, 821 (7t h Cir. 1988) (noting, in 11 U.S.C. § 1325 case, that courts have found debtors &
con duct in filing for bankruptcy soon after entry of judgment indicates desire t o manipulate bankruptcy procedures to avoid paying debt).
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.