Thomas B. Donovan
How Judge Donovan rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Donovan no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Donovan
Thomas B. Donovan served as a United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Central District of California from March 1994 until his retirement in March 2017. He was reappointed in 2008. Before joining the bench, he practiced law in Washington, D.C., and California and earned a bachelor’s degree and law degree from the University of California, Berkeley.
How Judge Donovan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
Attorney neglect can justify vacating a dismissal when it is so extreme that attributing it to the client would undermine a merits decision.
“Brookins’s neglect was ‘so gross that it is inexcusable.’”
Cautions
A party seeking relief after dismissal should be prepared to show diligent prosecution at each stage.
“Plaintiff has failed, at every turn, to diligently and effectively prosecute his adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Court.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The court’s order dismissing the adversary proceeding for failure to prosecute is hereby vacated.”
“Plaintiff’s adversary complaint for nondischargeability is dismissed, with leave to file and serve a First Amended Complaint no later than 21 days from the entry of this order.”
“Debtor’s Plan [Doc. No. 84] and each of its provisions (as if set forth in this Order) is conditionally approved and confirmed pursuant to Sections 1129(a) of 11 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. (the ‘Bankruptcy Code’), subject to the following three conditions:”
“dismissal of each of the Jointly Administered Debtors’ chapter 11 cases is in the best interest of creditors and the estates.”
“there are substantial and compelling equitable grounds for remand of the Removed Action under 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b).”
“there are substantial and compelling equitable grounds for remand of the Removed Action under 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b).”
“there are substantial and compelling equitable grounds for remand of the Removed Action under 28 U.S.C. § 1452(b).”
“The Debtors’ objections to the Bank’s claims are overruled. The Bank’s claims as amended in Claim No. 11 are granted.”
“dismissal under 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(3)(B) is appropriate”
“approval of the Disclosure Statement is denied.”
“In light of the foregoing, the Motion is granted under 11 U.S.C § 362(d)(1). The stay provided under Rule 4001(a)(3) is waived.”
“Its current, late filed employment application is granted, but subject to § 330, not § 328.”
“For all the forgoing reasons, the court believes that an award of $35,200 is reasonable and appropriate.”
A historical record
Judge Donovan no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.