Opinion ID: 74324
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Contempt charges

Text: 7 This Court does not mean to suggest that all of the proofs of claim were filed in a timely fashion under the rule. 9 The bankruptcy judge recommended that the Debtor be found in both civil and criminal contempt. The bankruptcy judge also recommended that the debtor be incarcerated to force her to turn over the 1994 Cadillac, the deposit monies, and her husband’s location. The Cadillac, deposit monies, and her husband’s location were all acquired by the Trustee soon after this recommendation was filed. The district court refused the recommendation for sanctions noting there was “no credible evidence that [the Debtor could] comply with the court order requiring her to disclose [the Cadillac’s] location to the Trustee.” Dionne v. Simmons, 5, No. 98-0331-W (N.D. Ala. filed Feb. 19, 1998) The Trustee only appeals the district court's denial of civil contempt. The Court of Appeals reviews a district court’s grant or denial of civil contempt in a bankruptcy proceeding for abuse of discretion. See In re Jove Engineering, Inc., 92 F.3d 1539, 1546 (11th Cir. 1996). Soon after the contempt recommendation was filed the Trustee located and took possession of the Debtor's Cadillac and deposit monies, thereby mooting the issue. The district court may have been erroneous in its finding that there was no credible evidence about the Debtor’s ability to comply with the bankruptcy court order to disclose the location of the Cadillac, but it is not necessary that we decide whether the district court abused its discretion. As there was no longer a need to hold the Debtor in 10 contempt, we agree that civil contempt penalties should not have then been imposed upon the Debtor.