In Re John Richards Homes Building Co., L.L.C.
2003 Bankr. LEXIS 368, 41 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 60, 291 B.R. 727 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under 11 U.S.C. § 303(i), a creditor who files an involuntary bankruptcy petition in bad faith is liable for compensatory and punitive damages. Bad faith is determined by a totality of the circumstances test, and exists where a creditor knows their claim is subject to a bona fide dispute and files the petition with the wrongful intent to harass the debtor or destroy their business.
Facts:
- Kevin Adell entered into a contract with John Richards Homes Building Company, L.L.C. (JRH) for the sale of land and construction of a multi-million dollar home.
- Following the closing, significant disputes arose between Adell and JRH concerning the allocation of the purchase price and alleged construction delays.
- During a meeting to discuss the disputes, Adell asked JRH's principal, John Shekerjian, if the company could "take the hit to its reputation if an involuntary bankruptcy was filed."
- Adell's state court attorney sent a letter to Shekerjian threatening criminal prosecution by the Attorney General and FBI unless JRH met Adell's demands.
- Adell hired a public relations firm, Marx Layne, to proactively publicize the involuntary bankruptcy filing to multiple newspapers, providing them with a false list of dissatisfied JRH customers.
- Adell personally contacted at least two of JRH's other creditors, threatening that they would only be paid if they joined his involuntary petition.
- Adell deliberately withheld from his bankruptcy counsel key documents showing that JRH vigorously disputed his claims, including JRH's answer and counter-complaint from the state court litigation.
Procedural Posture:
- Kevin Adell filed a lawsuit against John Richards Homes Building Company, L.L.C. (JRH) in Oakland County Circuit Court (a state trial court) alleging fraud, breach of contract, and other claims.
- JRH filed an answer denying the claims and a counter-complaint against Adell for breach of contract, defamation, and extortion.
- Six days later, Adell filed an involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition against JRH in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
- JRH filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy petition, arguing Adell's claim was subject to a bona fide dispute and that the petition was filed in bad faith.
- JRH also requested an award of compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees and costs, under 11 U.S.C. § 303(i).
- The Bankruptcy Court granted the motion to dismiss, finding Adell's claim was indeed subject to a bona fide dispute, and retained jurisdiction to adjudicate JRH's request for damages.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Under 11 U.S.C. § 303(i), does a creditor act in bad faith by filing an involuntary bankruptcy petition when the creditor knows their claim is subject to a bona fide dispute and files with the intent to damage the alleged debtor's business through improper means?
Opinions:
Majority - Rhodes, C.J.
Yes. A creditor acts in bad faith under § 303(i) when, under the totality of the circumstances, they file an involuntary petition with wrongful intent rather than a sincere belief they are entitled to bankruptcy relief. Here, the evidence overwhelmingly shows Adell filed the petition to intimidate JRH into a settlement or destroy its business. Adell knew his claim was subject to a bona fide dispute, as JRH had filed substantial defenses and counterclaims in state court and its attorneys had explicitly informed his attorneys that the claims were contested. Adell's bad faith was further evidenced by his hiring a public relations firm to publicize the filing, threatening JRH with criminal prosecution, attempting to coerce other creditors to join the petition, and flaunting his wealth. Adell's reliance-on-counsel defense fails because a client cannot reasonably rely on an attorney's advice when the client deliberately withholds pertinent facts, as Adell did by failing to provide his bankruptcy counsel with JRH's responsive pleadings and letters. This pattern of conduct demonstrates an extreme abuse of the bankruptcy process, justifying substantial compensatory and punitive damages.
Analysis:
This decision provides a clear and detailed application of the 'totality of the circumstances' test for determining bad faith in filing an involuntary bankruptcy petition under 11 U.S.C. § 303(i). It establishes a strong precedent that using bankruptcy as a litigation tactic in a two-party dispute, rather than as a collective creditor remedy, constitutes an abuse of process. The case significantly limits the 'advice of counsel' defense, clarifying that it is unavailable to a client who withholds material information from their attorney. The substantial punitive damages award, analyzed under the Supreme Court's 'Gore' guideposts, serves as a powerful deterrent against weaponizing the bankruptcy system for purposes of extortion or commercial destruction.
