Field v. Mans

USCA1 Opinion









August 29, 1994
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


____________________


No. 94-1391

WILLIAM FIELD AND NORINNE FIELD,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

PHILIP W. MANS,

Defendant, Appellee.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE


[Hon. Martin F. Loughlin, U.S. Senior District Judge]
__________________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,
___________
Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Christopher J. Seufert on brief for appellants.
______________________
Philip W. Mans on brief pro se.
______________


____________________


____________________





















Per Curiam. Having reviewed carefully the briefs and
__________

the record in this case, we affirm the judgment of the

district court, affirming the decision of the bankruptcy

court denying appellants' request to have the debt of

approximately $150,000 of appellee to appellants excepted

from discharge under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A).

This circuit has determined that to establish that a

debt is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A) a

creditor must prove, inter alia, that his "reliance was
_____ ____

reasonable in the circumstances." In re Burgess, 955 F.2d
______________

134, 140 (1st Cir. 1992). Since we find no clear error, see
___

In re Corporacion de Servicios Medicos Hospitalarios de
_____________________________________________________________

Fajardo, 805 F.2d 440, 447-48 (1st Cir. 1986) (determination
_______

of reasonableness reviewed for clear error), in the finding

by the bankruptcy court that the creditors' reliance in this

case was not reasonable, the judgment below is affirmed.1
________















____________________

1. In bankruptcy matters, this court conducts an independent
review of both the factual and legal findings of the
bankruptcy court. In re G.S.F. Corp., 938 F.2d 1467, 1474
__________________
(1st Cir. 1991). Therefore, any error committed by the
district court in findings of fact during its review of the
bankruptcy court decision would be harmless.