1:04-ap-01137•State of New Mexico, ex.rel. v. Graffis
Texte intégral
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO PACER Cover Sheet for Electronically Filed Documents Any data shown here are current as of . Any element of information on this form, except the received date, is subject to change as changes may be made to the Court's official docket. Case Title: Case Number: Document Information Description: Date Filed: Date Entered On Docket: Filer Information Submitted By: If this form is attached to the document identified above, it serves as an endorsed copy of the document as it existed on the above date. To confirm that nothing has changed since then, review the docket. 06/11/06 State of New Mexico, ex.rel. v. Paul Henry Graffis 04-01137 Order Granting [19-1] Motion To Quash Summons by State of New Mexico, ex.rel. Granting [18-1] Motion To Dismiss Third-Party Complaint by State of New Mexico, ex.rel. Denying [17-1] Motion To Stay Proceedings with Respect to the Third-Party Complaint by State of New Mexico, ex.rel. . Received on: 2004-11-15 09:59:35.000 2004-11-15 00:00:00.000 2004-11-16 00:00:00.000 Ellen Snyder Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 1 of 7
1 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO In re: Paul Henry Graffis, No. 7-04-11497 MF State of New Mexico, ex rel. Patricia Madrid, Attorney General, Plaintiff, v. Adv. No. 04-1137 M Paul Henry Graffis, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Christopher Adams and Paul Adams, et al., Third Party Defendants. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT, TO QUASH SUMMONS AND DENYING MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint (the “Motion to Dismiss”) filed on October 6, 2004 by the State of New Mexico ex rel. Patricia Madrid, Attorney General (“Plaintiff”). The Plaintiff also filed a Motion to Stay Proceedings With Respect to the Third-Party Complaint (the “Motion to Stay Proceedings”). The Plaintiff filed the Complaint on July 2, 2004 seeking to determine dischargeability of debts against the Debtor, Paul Henry Graffis (the “Defendant”), pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 523(a)(2)(A) alleging violations by the Defendant of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act in connection with sales of used vehicles. On September 8, 2004, the Defendant filed a Third-Party Complaint against fifty-two third party defendants (the “Third-Party Defendants”) alleging that the Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 2 of 7
1 Several of the Third-Party Defendants have joined in the Motion to Dismiss. 2 Third-Party Defendants are the proper parties to assert claims against Defendant and that any debts to the Third-Party Defendants should be declared dischargeable. The Plaintiff argues that the Third-Party Complaint is inappropriate and unnecessary because the Plaintiff is empowered to pursue restitution from the Debtor on behalf of the Third-Party Defendants as citizens and consumers protected under the Unfair Practices Act.1 See NMSA § 57-12-1 to § 57-12-16; State of New Mexico v. Gurley Motor Co., 105 N.M. 803, 737 P.2d 1180 (Ct. App. 1987) (recognizing power of Attorney General to sue for restitution on behalf of citizens under Unfair Practices Act). The filing of third-party complaints is governed by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7014(a), which provides as follows: At any time after commencement of the action a defending party, as a third-party plaintiff, may cause a summons and complaint to be served upon a person not a party to the action who is or may be liable to the third-party plaintiff for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against the third- party plaintiff. The third-party plaintiff need not obtain leave to make the service if the third- party plaintiff files the third-party complaint not later than 10 days after serving the original answer. Otherwise the third-party plaintiff must obtain leave on motion upon notice to all parties to the action. The Defendant filed his original answer on August 11, 2004 and filed his Third-Party Complaint on September 8, 2004, beyond the 10 day deadline in Rule 7014(a). Under Rule 7014(a), the Defendant was required to obtain leave of Court by filing a motion and notice to all parties in this proceeding. The Defendant did not request such leave. Because the Third-Party Complaint was filed without leave of this Court in violation of Rule 7014(a), the Court will grant the Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss. The Motion to Stay Proceedings will be Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 3 of 7
3 denied as moot. The purpose of a third-party complaint or impleader, is to allow claims against parties who may be liable to the defendant for all or part of the claims against the defendant. The allegations in the Complaint indicate that the Third-Party Defendants are, in fact, customers of Defendant’s business Mega Auto Super Store, Inc. who have filed complaints with the State Attorney General’s office against the Defendant alleging violations of the Unfair Practices Act. Thus, the Third-Party Complaint is an inappropriate use of the procedure outlined in Rule 7014(a). See Campbell Sixty-Six Express, Inc. v. Empire Bank (In re Campbell Sixty-Six Express, Inc.), 94 B.R. 1014, 1016 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1988)(key requirement of third party complaint is that third-party defendant is or may be liable to the third-party plaintiff for all or part of the plaintiff's claim against the third-party plaintiff, which may include indemnity, subrogation, warranty, and contribution). This is certainly not the case here. Cf. Boucher v. McCarter (In re McCarter), 289 B.R. 759 (Bankr. D. N.M. 2002)(dismissing third party complaint in dischargeability proceeding), citing Gulf Insurance Group v. Narumanchi (In re Narumanchi), 221 B.R. 311, 315 n. 9 (Bankr.D.Conn.1998) (questioning whether a party could ever be secondarily liable to bankruptcy debtor in connection with dischargeability proceeding because dischargeability actions are declaratory in nature). WHEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Third-Party Complaint is dismissed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Stay Proceedings is denied as moot. MARK B. McFEELEY UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE I certify that on the date shown on the attached document verification, a true and correct copy of Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 4 of 7
4 the foregoing was either electronically transmitted, faxed, delivered or mailed to the listed counsel and/or parties. Joel Cruz-Esparza Assistant Attorney General (Plaintiff) 111 Lomas NW, Suite 300 Albuquerque, NM 87120 George Moore Attorney for Defendant P.O. Box 216 Albuquerque, NM 87103-0216 Larry T Thrower Attorney for Christopher and Paula Adams and Blackhorse and Bonita Benally PO Box 5657 Farmington, NM 87499 -5657 Karen Casias PO Box 84 Tierra Amarilla, NM 87575 Brad and Sherri Clark #12 CR 6255 Kirtland, NM 87417 Justin Lesky Attorney for Brooke Frakes 108 Wellesley SE Albuquerque, NM 87106 -1444 Gerals Rector and Linda Rector 219 N. Newby Lane Bloomfield, NM 87413 Les Comiford and Kimberly Comiford 1009 N. Monterey Farmington, NM 87401 Andrew Hoskie 50 Rd 6219 NBU 64 Kirtland, NM 87417 Gerald Rogers and Gera Rogers 5309 1st Ave. Farmington, NM 87402 Allen Troutman 308 S. Johnson Bloomfield, NM 87413 Robert and Joan Beverly 27847 Highway 550 North Durango, CO 81301 Mary Blaisdell 612 N. Beech Cortez, CO 81321 Thomas and Barbara Cook 2704 E. 30th Streete Farmington, NM 87402 Julius Curley 55 E. Carpenter Street Cortez, CO 81321 Walter Nichols 301 S. Wire Ave. Aztec, NM 87410 Lyle and Paula Bair 23691 Rd. L Cortez, CO 81321 Nyla Davis and Delores Olson 07 Las Manamtas Los Lunas, NM 87031 Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 5 of 7
5 Eddie Kee 362 West 200 North 446 Blanding, UT 84511 Mike Rascon P.O. Box 985 Bloomfield, NM 87413 Matthew Bowman 4724 Sunrise Circle Farmington, NM 87401 Tamara Johnson 815 S. Chestnut #27 Cortez, CO 81321 Roszita and Rex Lee PO Box 15071 Farmington, NM 87401 Maria Valarde P.O. Box 1859 Sheep Springs, NM 86364 John and Alice Duke 8408 Litton Lane, NBU 269 Farmington, NM 87401 Richard Ivy 331 Kittell Loop Bloomfield, NM 87413 Charlene Nabahe PO Box 1859 Sheep Springs, NM 87364 Russell Florez 6780 Hwy 64 Bloomfield, NM 87413 Rosemary Aguilar HC 75 Box 9 Tierra Amarilla, NM 87575 Rhonda Ochs 3108 Marquette Farmington, NM 87402 Lynda Plank P.O. Box 1682 Kirtland, NM 87417 Marcella Espinosa 606 S. Laguna Farmington, NM 87401 Susan Schaefer McDevitt Attorney for Diane Luna PO Box 6700 Santa Fe, NM 87502 -6700 Floyd W Lopez Attorney for Stephen Swaim PO Box 10285 Albuquerque, NM 87184 -0285 Patricia Marquez P.O. Box 1452 Mayer, AZ 86333 Tina Henderson 1008 Cooper Farmington, NM 87401 Jay Larson 1401 Homestead Court Irving, TX 78061 Patricia Sanchez-Marquez #12 CR 5508 Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 6 of 7
6 Bloomfield, NM 87413 Warren Jay Conner 13993 Road 29 Dolores, CO 81321 Anthony McKay P.O. Box 3795 Farmington, NM 87499 Diane Luna P.O. Box 802 Tierra Amarilla, NM 87575 Ellen C. Snyder Law Clerk Case 04-01137-m Doc 42 Filed 11/15/04 Entered 11/16/04 15:06:00 Page 7 of 7
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.