Brune

Brune v. Parrott

Good Law
2017 WL 2546819·570 B.R. 86·2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90924
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 13, 2017No. 2:15-cv-01644-TLNCalifornia2,435 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nunley, J.

ORDER

This is a bankruptcy appeal. Appellant Karl Bruñe (“Bruñe”) was a creditor of Appellees Blane Leland Parrott (“Blane”) and Jenette Lavaun Parrott (“Jenette”) (collectively “the Parrotts”). Bruñe filed an adversary action in the bankruptcy court, claiming the Parrotts’ debt to him was not dischargeable in bankruptcy. He was unsuccessful before the bankruptcy court and he now appeals. For the reasons below, the judgment of the bankruptcy court is AFFIRMED.

I. Background

The issue started with a joint bank account. (Appellees’ App., ECF No. 15-1 at 4.) 1 Bruñe is a contractor whom the Par-rotts hired to work on their home in Paradise, California. (ECF No. 15-1 at 4.) According to Bruñe, the Parrotts obtained a construction loan for the work using Brune’s state-issued contractor’s license. (ECF No. 15-1 at 4.) Bruñe and the Par-rotts opened a joint checking account together and directed nearly $300,000 of the loan funds to be deposited into the joint account incrementally. (ECF No. 15-1 at 4.) However, the Parrotts eventually withdrew or transferred roughly $250,000 from the joint account into their personal account. (ECF No. 15-1 at 4.) Bruñe completed the initial work for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.