Filed: Jul. 25, 2000
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 25 2000 THOMAS K. KAHN No. 99-15093 CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 99-00741-CV-GET-1 IN RE: SLAUGHTER COMPANY & ASSOCIATES, Debtor. _ ALCATEL CONTRACTING (NA), INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, versus NEIL C. GORDON, Trustee-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _ (July 25, 2000) Before TJOFLAT and HULL, Circuit Judges, and PROPST
Summary: [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS _ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 25 2000 THOMAS K. KAHN No. 99-15093 CLERK _ D. C. Docket No. 99-00741-CV-GET-1 IN RE: SLAUGHTER COMPANY & ASSOCIATES, Debtor. _ ALCATEL CONTRACTING (NA), INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, versus NEIL C. GORDON, Trustee-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _ (July 25, 2000) Before TJOFLAT and HULL, Circuit Judges, and PROPST*..
More
[PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 25 2000 THOMAS K. KAHN No. 99-15093 CLERK ________________________ D. C. Docket No. 99-00741-CV-GET-1 IN RE: SLAUGHTER COMPANY & ASSOCIATES, Debtor. __________________________________________________________________ ALCATEL CONTRACTING (NA), INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, versus NEIL C. GORDON, Trustee-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _________________________ (July 25, 2000) Before TJOFLAT and HULL, Circuit Judges, and PROPST*, District Judge. PER CURIAM: * Honorable Robert B. Propst, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, sitting by designation. After review and oral argument, we affirm in full the judgment of the district court which reversed the bankruptcy court’s denial of Appellant Alcatel’s motion to have its proof of claim treated as timely filed. The judgment of the district court is correct for the reasons set out in the district court’s thorough and well-reasoned order, dated September 8, 1999. AFFIRMED. 2
