From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Robasty Corp.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
Dec 26, 2007
Case No. 2:07-cv-759-FtM-29, Bankr. No. 9:06-bk-7219-ALP (M.D. Fla. Dec. 26, 2007)

Opinion

Case No. 2:07-cv-759-FtM-29, Bankr. No. 9:06-bk-7219-ALP.

December 26, 2007


OPINION AND ORDER


This matter comes before the Court on appellants' Motion for Enlargement of the Time to File Appellant Reply Brief (Doc. #7) filed on December 21, 2007. Appellants seek a brief extension of time to file a reply brief. For the reasons stated below, the Court will grant the motion.

Also before the Court is appellees' Motion to Bifurcate and Stay Appeal and to Remand to United States Bankruptcy Court for Detailed Order (Doc. #5), filed on December 3, 2007. No response has been filed, however, it would appear that appellees agree to the relief sought as to at least one issue on appeal.

The Notice of Appeal (Doc. #1-2) stems from the "Order on Objections to Fees and Costs of Dimare — Tampa Tampa, Inc. (45-1) and Custom Pak, Inc. (46-1) Filed by Chapter 7 Trustee (Doc. 166) and Jacques Scott Group Ltd (Doc. 165)" (Doc. #1-3) sustaining in part and overruling in part the objections filed by appellees in the Bankruptcy Court, and allowing attorney's fees and costs to be reduced to $3,400.00. The issues presented on appeal by appellants are whether the Bankruptcy Court abused its discretion by failing to provide a written memorandum or decision explaining the reasons for the 73% reduction of contractual fees and costs; and whether the Bankruptcy Court abused its discretion by reducing appellants' contractually due fees and costs by 73%. (Doc. #3, p. 6.)

Since the parties agree that the Order on Objections, even with a transcript, should be more detailed, and the Court cannot conduct a meaningful review without an articulated basis, the Court will issue a limited remand to correct the matter. See In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litig., 643 F.2d 195 (5th Cir. 1981), aff'd, 659 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir. 1981); Serra Chevrolet, Inc. v. GMC, 446 F.3d 1137 (11th Cir. 2006); Jernigan v. United States, 180 Fed. Appx. 56 (11th Cir. 2006); United States v. Stevenson, 240 Fed. Appx. 343 (11th Cir. 2007).

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

1. Appellees' Motion to Bifurcate and Stay Appeal and to Remand to United States Bankruptcy Court for Detailed Order (Doc. #5) is GRANTED as follows:

a. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8013, the "Order on Objections to Fees and Costs of Dimare — Tampa Tampa, Inc. (45-1) and Custom Pak, Inc. (46-1) Filed by Chapter 7 Trustee (Doc. 166) and Jacques Scott Group Ltd (Doc. 165)" is remanded for the limited purpose of supplementing the record on appeal to articulate the basis for the 73% reduction of contractual fees and costs;

b. The second issue on appeal is bifurcated to the extent that it will be addressed after the record is supplemented; and

c. The appeal is otherwise stayed until such time as the supplemental record is transmitted to the District Court.

2. Appellants' Motion for Enlargement of the Time to File Appellant Reply Brief (Doc. #7) is GRANTED to the extent that the reply brief may be filed within TEN (10) DAYS of the stay being lifted.

3. The Clerk shall transmit a copy of this Opinion and Order to the Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court for further action.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida.


Summaries of

In re Robasty Corp.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
Dec 26, 2007
Case No. 2:07-cv-759-FtM-29, Bankr. No. 9:06-bk-7219-ALP (M.D. Fla. Dec. 26, 2007)
Case details for

In re Robasty Corp.

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: ROBASTY CORP., Debtor. CUSTOM PAK, INC. and DIMARE TAMPA, INC.…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division

Date published: Dec 26, 2007

Citations

Case No. 2:07-cv-759-FtM-29, Bankr. No. 9:06-bk-7219-ALP (M.D. Fla. Dec. 26, 2007)