Peugeot v. United States Trustee (In Re Crayton)
United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RIEGLE, Bankruptcy Judge.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEEDINGS
Attorney Brad J. Peugeot, Esq. (“Peugeot”) was paid $1,400 by the Debtor, who filed a Chapter 11 2 petition in pro per. Peugeot did not seek employment as required by the bankruptcy code. He also failed to file a Rule 2016(b) statement.
The bankruptcy court issued an “Order to Show Cause Why Brad J. Peugeot Should Not Be Barred From Practicing In The Bankruptcy Court Of The Central District of California, Why He Should Not Be Reported To The State Bar and Why He Should Not Disgorge Fees” (“Order To Show Cause”). The Order to…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Stephen Yagman v. Republic Insurance Cna Insurance Valley Forge InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Randall v. BrighamSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Hale v. United States Trustee (In Re Basham)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Price v. LehtinenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- In Re CastorenaUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · 2001
- Price v. Lehtinen (In Re Lehtinen)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- In Re Brooks-HamiltonUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.