Opinion
No. 78-466WK
November 5, 1979 As Amended November 14, 1979
Paul L. Herron, Law Offices of Zion Klein, Bryn Mawr, Pa., for debtor/defendant.
Gene A. Foehl, Media, PA, for Anderson.
Read Rocap, Jr., Media, Pa., for Sealtest.
OPINION
An admitted failure of the bankrupt's counsel to read the pleadings is not inadvertent or excusable neglect such as to relieve a bankrupt from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Court allegedly based upon "admission" which was in fact a typographical error. See Rule 924 at ¶ 20,354.
The debtor failed to respond to a paragraph in a creditor's counterclaim which alleged that the debtor had no claim to a certain escrow fund. As a result, judgment was entered in favor of the creditor on this issue. The counsel for the debtor stated that his secretary, in typing from his notes, omitted the paragraph which he had answered "denied". Counsel also admitted that he had compounded the typographical error by failing to read the pleadings before coming to Court.
Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule of Procedure 924, which incorporates Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. . ." In this instance, the court determined that the failure of counsel to read the pleadings was not inadvertent or excusable neglect and therefore refused to grant relief from the judgment.