Court Opinion

ID: 74658
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-26 08:53:04+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:43.467433
License: Public Domain

[PUBLISH]

                  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                               FILED
                            FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT                  U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                             ________________________                   ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
                                                                            JULY 25 2000
                                                                         THOMAS K. KAHN
                                     No. 99-15093                             CLERK
                               ________________________

                         D. C. Docket No. 99-00741-CV-GET-1

IN RE: SLAUGHTER COMPANY & ASSOCIATES,
                                         Debtor.
__________________________________________________________________

ALCATEL CONTRACTING (NA), INC.,
                                                           Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                            versus

NEIL C. GORDON,
                                                           Trustee-Appellant.

                               ________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Georgia
                           _________________________
                                   (July 25, 2000)

Before TJOFLAT and HULL, Circuit Judges, and PROPST*, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

   *
    Honorable Robert B. Propst, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, sitting
by designation.
      After review and oral argument, we affirm in full the judgment of the district

court which reversed the bankruptcy court’s denial of Appellant Alcatel’s motion to

have its proof of claim treated as timely filed.

      The judgment of the district court is correct for the reasons set out in the district

court’s thorough and well-reasoned order, dated September 8, 1999.

      AFFIRMED.

                                            2