Paul R. Thomas
How Judge Thomas rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Thomas decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A detailed nondischargeability complaint survived dismissal where the allegations tied a specific representation to the use of construction funds, reliance, and resulting lien injury.
“Thus, in interpreting the Complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, the Court finds it does provide sufficient factual allegations establishing a claim pursuant to § 523(a)(2)(A).”
Undisputed evidence of knowingly false employment-status reports and reliance supported summary judgment that an unemployment-benefit debt was nondischargeable.
“Even construing all facts and inferences in favor of Defendant, the Court finds Plaintiff has met its burden under § 523(a)(2)(A) to show its debt is nondischargeable, and it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Procedural preferences
The reviewed order prioritized moving a nearly two-year-old adversary proceeding to trial when the late request did not credibly show how additional discovery would assist trial preparation.
“Neither the Emergency Motion, nor Mr. Houts, makes any credible argument why these matters should not proceed to trial as expeditiously as possible.”
A proposed insider sale received heightened scrutiny for actual market exposure, independent negotiation, and a fair price rather than the debtor's stated valuation alone.
“The Court finds no evidence that any effort was made to market Debtor’s interest in the properties or the contracts, and thus there is no way for the Court to determine whether the price offered by KNZ is fair.”
The reviewed Chapter 7 claims order applied the rule's enumerated deadline exceptions rather than the general excusable-neglect standard and extended time where notice was insufficient.
“Rule 3002(c)’s seven subdivisions provide the exclusive means to extend the claims bar date in Chapter 7 cases.”
Cautions
A stay pending appeal was denied when the movant did not establish likely success or irreparable harm; possible appellate mootness alone did not carry the burden.
“The Court concludes Blanchard has failed to meet her burden to justify the granting of a stay pending appeal in this case.”
A request to return from Chapter 7 to Chapter 13 failed without evidence that the debtor could propose a feasible plan; further delay was not treated as a substitute for feasibility.
“Without the ability to propose a feasible plan, the Court concludes conversion would be futile and no purpose would be served in allowing further delay.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion to Reopen Discovery, filed by Clinton and Barbette Veit, Plaintiffs herein, at ECF No. 107, is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Letter, filed by creditor Steven Scattini, which the Court has treated as an Objection to the Trustee’s Final Report, is SUSTAINED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Letter, filed by creditor Steven Scattini, which the Court has treated as a Motion to extend time to file a timely claim, is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Relief from Default Judgment Denying Discharge, at ECF No. 13, is DENIED.”
“For the reasons set forth above, the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“For the reasons set forth above, the Motion is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Reconsider, at ECF No. 15, is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay Adversary, at ECF No. 4, and Motion for Case Management Order, ECF No. 18, are hereby DENIED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012), filed by Dustin D. Harris and Amanda J. Harris, Defendants herein, at ECF No. 16, is hereby DENIED.”
“Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) & (Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012), filed by Dustin D. Harris and Amanda J. Harris, Defendants herein, at ECF No. 21, is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Stay Pending Appeal Without Bond filed by Cynthia Diane Blanchard, at ECF No. 457, is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Trustee’s Motion to Strike or in the Alternative to Deny Claimant’s Objection to Trustee’s Final Report, at ECF No. 492, filed by Patrick J. Malloy, is hereby DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Claimant’s Objection to Trustee’s Final Report, at ECF No. 491, filed by Cynthia Diane Blanchard, is hereby OVERRULED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Debtor’s Reurged Motion for Reconversion of Bankruptcy to Chapter 13, filed by Christina Lee Lanier-Fravel, at ECF No. 122, is DENIED.”
“The Court concludes Debtor has failed to meet her burden to justify the imposition of a stay pending appeal in this case.”
“Lastly, Debtor’s request to reinstate the automatic stay pursuant to § 362 is denied, as she provides no authority or basis upon which to consider such a request.”
“Furthermore, given the Court’s decision regarding the request for a stay, Debtor’s request that the Court waive any requirement for the posting of a supersedeas bond or other security is moot.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
All six sampled matters remained pending in the index. Veit supplied one express contested outcome; the five fixed streams supplied no express retained outcome.
Draft for Judge Thomas with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Thomas, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Thomas's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace