United Hauling LLC v. Iron Rings Holdings LLC

Summary

This is a district court order addressing United Hauling LLC’s appeal from bankruptcy court orders concerning an allegedly overstated proof of claim and forfeiture under Arizona Revised Statute § 44-1202. The order analyzes whether filing an amended, overstated proof of claim constitutes usury and whether a daily late charge constitutes indirect interest subject to forfeiture. It also addresses the appellant’s renewed motion for a stay pending appeal.

Holdings

1. An overstated proof of claim that is later amended to reflect the correct amount owed does not, without receipt or retention of unlawful value, constitute reserving a greater sum under A.R.S. § 44-1202 and does not trigger forfeiture of all interest.
2. United Hauling waived its theory that the $100-per-day late charge constituted indirect interest because it did not present that theory to the Bankruptcy Court.
3. The district court declined to exercise its discretion to review the indirect-interest theory on the merits.
4. The renewed motion for a stay pending appeal was denied as moot after United Hauling withdrew it.

Questions Presented

1. Whether appellees' initially overstated proof of claim constituted reserving an unlawful greater sum under A.R.S. § 44-1202 and required forfeiture of all interest.
2. Whether United Hauling's theory that the note's $100-per-day late charge constituted indirect interest subject to forfeiture was preserved for appellate review.
3. Whether the district court should exercise discretion to consider the indirect-interest theory notwithstanding its lack of presentation to the Bankruptcy Court.
4. Whether the renewed motion for a stay pending appeal was moot after United Hauling withdrew the motion.

Disposition

affirmed