This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

In re Hatcher

Order


Cite as

1998 DJCAR 177

Published

Jan. 20, 1998

Filing Date

Jan. 13, 1998


In re: ALBERT TROY HATCHER and JANIS D. HATCHER, Debtors, WILLIAM J. WADE, Trustee, Appellant, v. ALBERT TROY HATCHER and JANIS D. HATCHER, Appellees. No. 97-7065 (D.C. No. 96-71607) (E.D. Okla.) (BAP No. 96-43) United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit Filed January 13, 1998 ORDER AND JUDGMENT(1)
        Before PORFILIO, KELLY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.
        After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
        Appellant William J. Wade, trustee for creditor Mid State Trust II, appeals from an adverse decision of the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit, which affirmed the disallowance of Wade's claim for post-petition attorney fees and dismissed Wade's premature appeal regarding his objections to debtors' unconfirmed Chapter 13 reorganization plan. See Wade v. Hatcher (In re Hatcher), 208 B.R. 959 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. 1997). Upon review of the parties' submissions, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated in the thorough and thoughtful opinion issued by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.
        The judgment is AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court
        John C. Porfilio
        Circuit Judge

        1. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.


#203866

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424