492 B.R. 620
Bankr. E.D.N.Y.2013Background
- Western seeks to reopen a closed bankruptcy case to pursue contempt and other relief; the prior motion to reopen was denied on Dec. 4, 2012.
- Western is an unacknowledged group claiming Indian tribe status; it lacks federal recognition by the BIA or courts.
- Property at 10 Tamarack Road, Greenfield Park, NY is central; Western pursued acquisition agreements in 2000–2001 with Ulster County and the Debtor, culminating in a sale that Western claimed would transfer title free and clear.
- An Amended Agreement in 2001 allowed installment payment of the Second Installment and required a DILF and a Confession of Judgment securing the Debtor’s obligation; Note and Confession of Judgment were executed and assigned as security.
- A series of interrelated lawsuits and foreclosure proceedings followed, including state and federal court actions; the Nachamie Firm and others’ involvement led to assignment of Confession of Judgment to Ulster Acquisitions, LLC; Foreclosure sale occurred in 2013.
- The court denied the First Motion to Reopen and, on the current motion, denied reopening for lack of jurisdiction, lack of new grounds, and non-attorney representation concerns; the case remains closed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case should be reopened for other cause under § 350(b). | Western seeks relief; argues extreme hardship and new grounds. | Court should defer; no new grounds and case disclosure insufficient. | Denied; no other-cause justification to reopen. |
| Whether Western can obtain declaratory recognition of tribal status and non-attorney representation. | Western seeks sovereign recognition and right to be represented by non-attorney Posr. | Fraass exception does not apply absent federal tribal recognition; cannot represent without licensed attorney. | Denied; lacks subject-matter jurisdiction and tribal recognition. |
| Whether assignment of the Confession of Judgment violated the Amended Agreement. | Contends assignment breached DILF restrictions. | Assignment valid as part of security; DILF provisions limited to DILF, not Confession. | Denied; assignment proper as security for Second Installment. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Slater, 200 B.R. 491 (E.D.N.Y.1996) (look-behind of judgments limited; not fraud or lack of jurisdiction here)
- Rowland v. Cal. Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194 (1993) (pro se appearance limitations for associations; non-attorney representation rules)
- Fraass Survival Systems, Inc. v. Absentee Shawnee Econ. Dev. Auth., 817 F.Supp. 7 (S.D.N.Y.1993) (broad rule against non-attorney representation; narrow Fraass exception not applicable here)
- Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1983) (tribal sovereignty and limits by Congress)