Court Opinion

ID: 1000720
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:44:55.799687+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:38:28.594132
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

In Re: MICHAEL C. FORTI; In Re:
GERALDINE E. FORTI,
Debtors.

MICHAEL C. FORTI; GERALDINE E.
FORTI,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
                                                                No. 99-1333
v.

ROBERT M. BERMAN; C. NELSON
BERMAN,
Defendants-Appellants,

and

JOEL I. SHER,
Trustee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge.
(CA-98-2959-MJG, BK-96-5-6693-SD)

Argued: November 30, 1999

Decided: January 27, 2000

Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and
Samuel G. WILSON, Chief United States District Judge
for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL

ARGUED: Edward Lee Blanton, Jr., Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellants. Alan M. Grochal, TYDINGS & ROSENBERG, L.L.P.,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Mary Fran Eber-
sole, TYDINGS & ROSENBERG, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Robert and C. Nelson Berman appeal the district court's decision
affirming the bankruptcy court's determination that the judicial liens
they had obtained on the property of Appellees, Michael and Geral-
dine Forti, as a result of consent judgments entered against the Fortis,
were not voluntary transfers under 11 U.S.C.A. § 522(g)(1) (West
1993) and could therefore be avoided as preferential transfers under
11 U.S.C.A. § 522(h) (West 1993) and 11 U.S.C.A. § 547 (West 1993
& Supp. 1999). The Bermans had sued the Fortis in state court in
Maryland because the Fortis failed to repay a series of loans made by
the Bermans to Forti Builders, Inc. and because Michael Forti failed
to repay a personal loan made to him by C. Nelson Berman. The loans
to Forti Builders, which had filed for bankruptcy protection, were
guaranteed by Michael and Geraldine Forti, the Vice President and
President, respectively, of Forti Builders. The liens in question arose
by operation of law after Robert and C. Nelson Berman each secured
a consent judgment against the Fortis. Shortly after the consent judg-
ments were entered, the Fortis filed for bankruptcy protection and
brought this action in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Dis-
trict of Maryland to avoid the judicial liens on their property as pref-
erential transfers.

                    2
We have had the benefit of oral argument and have reviewed the
record, the parties' briefs, and the applicable law. Because we find no
reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See
Berman v. Forti, 232 B.R. 653 (D. Md. 1999).

AFFIRMED

                    3