Court Opinion

ID: 2965072
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:52.005453+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:30.020093
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1903

                                  ATHENA PALEOLOGOS,

                                      Appellant,

                                          v.

                              DAVID M. NICKLESS, ET AL.,

                                      Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                   [Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Athena Paleologos on brief pro se.
            _________________
            David  M.  Nickless  and   Nickless  and  Phillips  on  brief  for
            ___________________        _______________________
        appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                           
                                   January 23, 1998
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   We have carefully reviewed the  record and
                 __________

            briefs on  appeal and affirm  the judgment of  the Bankruptcy

            Court.  Although the avoidance  provisions of 11 U.S.C.   549

            may  sometimes operate  in  a  manner  which  appears  harsh,

            bankruptcy courts must exercise their equitable powers within

            the  confines  of   the  Bankruptcy  Code.      Norwest  Bank
                                                            _____________

            Worthington v. Ahlers,  485 U.S. 197, 206 (1988).   The court
            ___________    ______

            has no  power to upset the scheme of distribution established

            by the Code.   In re SPM Manufacturing  Corporation, 984 F.2d
                           ____________________________________

            1305, 1311 (1st Cir. 1993).

                 With  respect to  Appellant's  remaining arguments,  she

            made  no proper showing that Trustee's action was time-barred

            or otherwise inconsistent with the requirements of the Code.1
                                                                        1

                 Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________

                                
            ____________________

               1  Appellant's request for  oral argument by  telephone is
               1
            hereby denied.

                                         -2-