FI L ED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V E N T H C IR C U IT MAY 28, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

N o. 07- 1517 6
D. C. Docket N o. 07-01398 CV -IP J

BK 06 -8 19 87 -J AC In Re: MO RGA

N T . JO NE S, D e b t o r .

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ __ MOR GA N T . JO NE S, Pl ai nti ff -Appe llant,
ve rs us GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, BILL SMI TH PONTIAC BUICK GMC, INC ., D ef en da nts -Appe lle es . Appeal f rom the United State s District Court f o r t h e N o rt h e rn D i s t r i c to f

A l ab a ma (M ay 2 8, 200 8)Honora ble Har vey E. Schlesing er, Un i t ed States District J udg e for the Middle District of * Florida , sitti ng by

desig nation. An adve rsar

y complaint is a simplified form of civil ac tion between a bankruptc y

estate a nd 1 a cr editor, broug ht in the context of a bankruptcy proce eding
. Se e Slo bo din sk yv . S alki n, ( In re Sa be r) , 26 4 F .3 d 13 17 , 13 24 n. 11 (1 1th Cir
. 20 01 ). “ I n b ank ru ptc y , a dv e rs ary

pr oc e e din g s g e ne ra lly are vie we d a s ‘ sta

nd -a lon e la

w s u i t s , ’ and

fi na l ju dg me nts iss ue d in

a dv e rs ary pr oc e e din g s are us ua lly appea lable as if the di spute had a risen outside of ba

nkruptcy .” Dzikowski v. Boomer’ s Sports & Rec

. Ctr., Inc., (

In re: Boca Are na, Inc.) , 184 F.3d 1285, 1286 ( 11th Cir. 1999).

2 Before DU BIN A and BARKET T, Circuit Judges, and SCH LE SIN GE R, District * Judg e. PE R CU RIA M: Appellant, Mor gan Jones (“ Jones”), a ppeals the dist rict court’ s order af fi rm ing the Bankr

upt cy Co urt’ s or de r, w hic h gr an te d su m m ar y j udgm en t t o th e de fe ndants on J one s’ s T ru th I n L en din g A ct ( “ T IL A ”) a dve rs ar

y c om pla int
. 1 T he iss ue s pr es en te d onappe al a re : (1 ) Wha t di sc los ur es the de fe ndants m ad e to J one s be fo re he sig ne d up f or Guar anteed Asset P rotection (“ GA P”) coverage; (2) Whether the disclosu res in the Retail I nstallm ent Sales Contrac t (“ RI SC ”) sid eb ar

a nd the S ton eb ri dge c ontra ct m et T IL A dis cl osur e- qua lity
re qui re m en ts; a nd (3 ) Whe the r G MA C, a s a n “ as sig ne e” of the c re dit

c ontra ct , is lia

ble f or a ny T IL A vio la tio ns.3

“ Ina n a ppe al f ro m adis tr ic t c ourt si tti ng a s a n a ppe lla te c ourt i n a ba nkr upt cy c as e, thi s C ourt e m

plo y s th e sa m e standard s of r ev ie w a s th e dis tr ic t court.” G ue rra v . F

ernand ez -R oc ha (

In re F ernand ez -R oc ha) , 451 F
. 3d 8 13, 815
n. 3 ( 11th C ir
. 200 6)
. “ Ina dve rs ar y pr oc ee din gs i n bankr

upt cy c as es , w e ap ply

the
usua l and w el l- know n su m m ar y j udgm en t st an da rd s” —w e ta ke the f ac ts i n th e light m ost favorable to the non -m ovin g party and reviewthe court’ s legal
co nc lu si on s d e n ov o. A sbesto s Se ttl em en t T rus t v
. Ci tyof Ne w Yo rk

, ( In re Cel ot ex Co rp .) , 487 F. 3d 13 20, 1328 (11t h Cir. 2007 ). A ft er r ev ie w ing the r ec or d, r ea din g th e pa rt ie s’ br ie fs a nd h av ing the be ne fi t of oral ar gum ent, w e af

firm the district court’ s order af firm ing th e Bankruptcy Co urt’ s or de r gr an tin g su m m ar y j udgm en t t o th e de fe ndants
. T he pr im ar

y pur pose of T IL A is dis cl osur e. I n th is c as e, the S ton eb ri dge Cas ua lt y Ins ur an ce co nt ract is cle ar an d u na m bi gu ou s re ga rd in g GAP i ns ur an ce. T he que sti on i n th is c as e, a cc or din g to Jon es , is w he the r w e can c onsi de r the T IL A dis cl osur es in the se pa ra te S ton eb ri dge c ontra ct , or w er e the dis cl osur es in the RISC all that shoul d have been considered by the bankruptcy

and district courts. W e conclude that it was appropriate to consider the Stonebridge contract
w he re the dis cl osur es a re c le ar a nd u na m

big uous .4

Be ca use w e se e no m er it to any of the a rg um en ts J one s m ak es in thi s a ppe al , w e af fi rm the dis tr ic t c ourt’ s or de r af fi rm ing the ba nkr

upt cy c ourt’ s or de r gr an tin g
sum m ar y j udgm en t t o th e de fe ndants
. AFFIRMED.