Court Opinion

ID: 2674386
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-05-16 00:01:19.524763+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:50:05.298881
License: Public Domain

ELECTRONIC CITATION: 2014 FED App. 0003P (6th Cir.)
                               File Name: 14b0003p.06

           BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

In re: MILLARD P. THOMAS, III,                    )
                                                  )
            Debtor.                               )
______________________________________            )
                                                  )
LAUREN A. HELBLING, Trustee,                      )
                                                  )
             Plaintiff - Appellant,               )          No. 13-8052
                                                  )
             v.                                   )
                                                  )
MILLARD P. THOMAS, III, et al.,                   )
                                                  )
            Defendants - Appellees.               )
______________________________________            )

                       Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court
                              for the Northern District of Ohio
                           Case No.12-14916; Adv. No. 13-1012

                               Decided and Filed: May 15, 2014

     Before: EMERSON, HARRISON, and LLOYD, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judges.

                                      ____________________

                                           COUNSEL

ON BRIEF: Lauren A. Helbling, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant. James E. Kovac, Cleveland,
Ohio, for Appellees.
                                     ____________________

                                           OPINION
                                     ____________________

       MARIAN F. HARRISON, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge. The issue before the Panel on
appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in holding that real property transferred in error to
Debtor by his Father pre-petition was impressed with a constructive trust as a matter of law, and
thus, the bankruptcy estate had no interest in the real property. The Panel reviews this conclusion
of law de novo. See In re Booth, 260 B.R. 281, 285 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. 2001); First Union Mortg.
Corp. v. Eubanks (In re Eubanks), 219 B.R. 468, 469 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). After
reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and applicable law, the Panel concludes that the bankruptcy
court did not err. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the bankruptcy court’s well-reasoned opinion
entered on November 12, 2013, Helbling v. Thomas, (In re Thomas),Ch. 7 Case No. 12-14916, Adv.
No. 13-1012 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2013) ECF No. 66, we affirm.

                                                 -2-