disclaimer stampThis website is not intended to be a legal advice resource. It is only meant to be used for educational reasons. Please don’t take any action or refrain from taking any action based on what you’ve read on this website. This website, article, or link may contain outdated, incorrect, or irrelevant information. It is your obligation to speak with an expert attorney who can apply current legislation or laws to your personal situation in a professional manner.

There is no attorney-client relationship formed by using this site or communicating with Law Office of D.L. Drain or any of our employees. Please read the complete disclaimer for additional information.

It is vital that you seek legal advice from a qualified attorney on your individual situation. It will almost certainly cost you less to seek advice before acting than it will to repair your mistakes.

BANKRUPTCY PETITION PREPARER, PARALEGAL OR DOCUMENT PREPARER

IMPORTANT: THIS FIRM MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS AS TO THE ACCURACY OR CURRENT STATUS OF ANY LAW, CASE, ARTICLE OR PUBLICATION CITED HEREIN OR LINKED TO.  WARNING – SOME OF THESE REFERENCES ARE PRE-BAPCPA.

Document Preparer fined $2,990 for failing to disclose his name, address, and social security number, executing documents on behalf of the debtor, giving legal advice, etc.

In re: CESAR MONTIEL PEREZ  SC-21-1173 (9th Circuit, Oct 18,2022) Not Published Ruling : Maurice Grayton appeals the bankruptcy court’s judgment imposing $2,990 in fines and damages under § 110.  The bankruptcy court granted in part the United States Trustee’s (“UST”) motion for summary judgment, finding that Grayton was a bankruptcy petition preparer (“BPP”) within the meaning of § 110(a)(1) and had violated several subsections of that statute by failing to disclose his name, address, and social security number, executing documents on behalf of the debtor, giving legal advice, and failing to file a disclosure of compensation. The bankruptcy court rejected Grayton’s defenses that the debtor was an expert on bankruptcy issues and had authorized Grayton to sign the schedules and that Grayton was under duress when he abided by the debtor’s demand to prepare the bankruptcy documents.
We AFFIRM.