Copperstate Supply Co., a Division of Anderson Air Activities, Inc., and John B. Marron v. Harley J. Fisher

Appellees Fisher, were granted a discharge in bankruptcy on February 10, 1969. On June 25, 1969, the estate was reopened to determine whether appellants be permanently enjoined from proceeding against the bankrupts in an Arizona Superior Court action to recover on a judgment obtained on May 22, 1968, and renewed on May 26, 1969. ' The court below, adopting the referee’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, granted the injunction. Appellants, here, object to that court’s findings and to its exercise of discretion in granting the injunction. Finding no error, we affirm.

Appellants’ objections pose two issues: (1) whether appellant Copperstate had sufficient notice of the earlier bankruptcy proceedings for their debt to be affected by the discharge; (2) whether sufficient circumstances were present to justify the court’s exercise of discretion in granting an injunction of state proceedings.

We note that recent changes in the law now give the bankruptcy court general jurisdiction to determine the effect of a discharge. Act of October 19, 1970, Public Law No. 91-467, 84 Stat. 990, amending § 2(a) (12) of the Bankruptcy Act, 52 Stat. 840 , 843 [ 11 U.S.C. § 11 (a) (12)]. However…

449 F.2d 760 COPPERSTATE SUPPLY CO., a division of Anderson Air Activities, Inc., and John B. Marron, Appellants, v. Harley J. FISHER et al., Appellees. No. 25246. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. September 30, 1971. John B. Marron (argued), of Gorodezky, Marron & Diamond, Phoenix, Ariz., for appellants. George F. Senner, Jr. (argued), of Cavness, DeRose & Senner, Phoenix, Ariz., for appellees. Before CHAMBERS and CARTER, Circuit Judges, and BYRNE, * District Judge. JAMES M. CARTER, Circuit Judge. 1 Appellees Fisher, were granted a discharge in bankruptcy on February 10, 1969. On June 25, 1969, the estate was reopened to determine whether appellants be permanently enjoined from proceeding against the bankrupts in an Arizona Superior Court action to recover on a judgment obtained on May 22, 1968, and renewed on May 26, 1969. The court below, adopting the referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law, granted the injunction. Appellants, here, object to that court's findings and to its exercise of discretion in granting the injunction. Finding no error, we affirm. 2 Appellants' objections pose two issues: (1) whether appellant Copperstate had sufficient…

(dissenting):

I respectfully dissent. As I view it, the appellees never established “unusual circumstances” within the meaning of Local Loan and Hilton, to justify the referee’s invocation of an equitable remedy. Because the Bankruptcy Act has been amended and the question cannot occur again, it would serve no purpose to express my views at length.