Marcel's Tanning Salons, Inc. v. Tanya C. Bennett

Opinion and Order


In bankruptcy adversary proceeding, parties and court established scheduling order containing deadlines for filing dispositive motions and responses thereto.

Debtor filed motion to dismiss Creditor's complaint to determine dischargeability. As required by local rule, Debtor served notice of motion containing a deadline for response--which was before the deadline contained in scheduling order.

Bankruptcy Court dismissed complaint prior to deadline set in scheduling order and denied motion to vacate dismissal. On appeal, U.S. District Court reversed Bankruptcy Court, holding that parties could not modify deadlines contained in scheduling order via notice procedures required by local rule.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Reference Info:Decision | Federal, 7th Circuit, Indiana | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© William L. Wilson, Anderson, Agostino & Keller, P.C. | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Anderson, Agostino & Keller, P.C. on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.