Case Name: In re CALORE EXPRESS COMPANY, INC., Debtor
Court: United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1998-12-30
Citations: 228 B.R. 338
Docket Number: No. 95-13291
Parties: In re CALORE EXPRESS COMPANY, INC., Debtor.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Bankruptcy Reporter
Volume: 228
Pages: 338–339

Head Matter:
In re CALORE EXPRESS COMPANY, INC., Debtor.
No. 95-13291.
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts.
Dec. 30, 1998.
Peter Sklarew, U.S. Dept, of Justice, Tax Division, Washington, D.C., for attorney Henry J. Riordan and the United States.
Joel Rosenthal, Shapiro, Israel & Weiner, P.C., Boston, MA, for Fleet National Bank.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM OF JUDGE FEENEY IN RESPONSE TO DISTRICT COURT ORDER
JOAN N. FEENEY, Bankruptcy Judge.
This matter is before the Court as a result of the District Court's "Memorandum And Order On Petition For Writ Of Mandamus," entered on February 24, 1998, in 226 B.R. 727. This Court deems it appropriate that separate orders be entered by Judges Fee-ney and Hillman in respect to the District Court order. This order reflects the determinations of Judge Feeney.
In this Court's "Memorandum" decision dated August 21, 1996 (reported at 199 B.R. 424), I (Judge Feeney) did not intend to impose sanctions upon attorney Henry J. Riordan. Nor did I intend to adjudicate Riordan guilty of professional misconduct. Furthermore, I did not, and do not, perceive a basis upon which it to make a referral of Mr. Riordan for disciplinary proceedings as provided in Rules 83.6 and 206 of the Local Rules of the District Court.
Nothing herein is intended by the Court to alter the August 21, 1996 decision and order with respect to the rights and interests of the United States or Fleet.
A separate order is being issued by Judge Hillman.
. District Court LR 83.6(4)(B) provides that acts or omissions that violate the ethical requirements and rules concerning the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts constitute misconduct for which attorneys appearing before the court may be disciplined. District Court LR 83.6(5)(A) provides that "[w]hen misconduct or allegations of misconduct that, if substantiated, would warrant discipline as to an attorney admitted to practice before this court, is brought to the attention of a judicial officer, whether by complaint or otherwise, and the applicable procedure is not otherwise mandated by these rules, the judicial officer may refer the matter to counsel for investigation, the prosecution of a formal disciplinary proceeding or the formulation of such other recommendation as may be appropriate." Other portions of the rule provide procedures for the investigator to commence a proceeding and for the adjudication of any charges. District Court LR 205 provides that "[a] judge of the bankruptcy court for the District of Massachusetts is authorized as a judicial officer to make referrals for disciplinary proceedings as provided under LR 83.6(5)(A)."