IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-50134
Summary Calendar
ELWOOD CLUCK,
Debtor,
ELWOOD CLUCK, KRISTINE A.
CLUCK AND FIRST CAPITAL MORTGAGE CO., INC.,
Appellants,
versus
RANDOLPH N. OSHEROW, TRUSTEE,
Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(SA 94 CV 120)
( July 7, 1995 )
Before GARWOOD, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Elwood Cluck, Kristine Cluck, and First Capital Mortgage
Company1 (collectively Cluck) argue that the bankruptcy court erred
in denying Cluck's request for sanctions. Cluck moved for
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that
have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on
the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless
expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."
Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion
should not be published.
1
The bankruptcy court found that First Capital Mortgage
Company was an alter ego of Elwood and Kristine Cluck.
sanctions because special counsel McKenzie signed the signature
block of counsel for the trustee in a motion to compel and for
expedited hearing. This, Cluck argues, misrepresented to the court
that McKenzie was a member of trustee's counsel's firm and merited
Rule 11 sanctions.
The bankruptcy court rightly rejected that argument.
Immediately above the trustee's counsel's name, address, and phone
number in the signature block -- below which McKenzie signed -- was
McKenzie's name, address, and phone number. The bankruptcy court
found that under a reasonable reading of the signature block, a
signature by either McKenzie and trustee's counsel was intended to
suffice for filing. The bankruptcy court's refusal to award
sanctions was not an abuse of discretion. See Childs v. State Farm
Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 29 F.3d 1018, 1023 (5th Cir. 1994) (Rule 11
sanctions are reviewed for abuse of discretion).
Cluck also adopts in this appeal the points of error he raised
and we refuted in Cluck v. Osherow, 95-50081.
AFFIRMED.