Summary
This unpublished opinion from the Tenth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirms the bankruptcy court's order granting an attorney's motion to withdraw as counsel in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case. The panel reviews the debtor's claims of procedural due process violations, improper treatment of a contempt motion as an objection, and judicial misconduct, concluding there was no abuse of discretion. The court finds good cause for the attorney's withdrawal based on a breakdown in communication and notes the debtor's failure to follow local rules for filing motions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Did the Bankruptcy Court err in failing to rule on the Motion for Contempt?
- Did the Bankruptcy Court err in denying Rusk’s request to strike the Motion to Withdraw?
- Did the Bankruptcy Court err in treating the Motion for Contempt as an objection to the Motion to Withdraw?
- Did the Bankruptcy Court err in granting the Motion to Withdraw?
- Did the Bankruptcy Court violate Rusk’s constitutional rights or engage in judicial misconduct?
Holdings
- The Bankruptcy Court did not err; it correctly declined to rule on the Motion for Contempt because the motion was not properly before the court.
- The Bankruptcy Court did not err; its denial was within the abuse‑of‑discretion standard.
- The Bankruptcy Court did not err; treating the filing as an objection was a permissible liberal construction of a pro se pleading.
- The Bankruptcy Court did not err; the motion complied with local rules and demonstrated good cause for withdrawal.
- No constitutional violation or judicial misconduct occurred; the court’s actions were within its discretionary authority.
Key quotations
“The record does not support Appellant’s allegations and reflects no bias, no improper application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, nor any other conduct by the Bankruptcy Court that would support a claim of judicial misconduct or violation of Appellant’s constitutional rights.” (15)
Factual background
Zachary Rusk filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition represented by attorney Derek Beutler. The attorney sought to withdraw, citing a breakdown in communication. The Bankruptcy Court granted the motion to withdraw and denied Rusk's request to strike the motion. Rusk subsequently filed a motion for contempt alleging ethical violations.
Procedural history
Rusk filed a Chapter 13 petition in 2023. In February 2025 the attorney, Derek Beutler, filed a motion to withdraw. The Bankruptcy Court granted the motion and denied Rusk's request to strike the motion. Rusk appealed the order granting the withdrawal.