Opinion
BK No. 5:03-bk-02170.
June 29, 2004
ORDER DISMISSING BANKRUPTCY PETITION FOR IMPROPER VENUE
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to the District Court's order dated June 25, 2004. The facts are relatively simple. The Debtors, who reside in Ohio, filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition in the Northern District of West Virginia. The United States, on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service, filed a motion to dismiss for improper venue.
At the hearing, the Court inquired as to whether or not the Debtors intended to file the delinquent tax returns. They indicated that they were not going to file the returns. The Court dismissed the Chapter 13 case on the basis that without tax returns, a Chapter 13 plan cannot be confirmed. The United States did not object. It was the Court's thought that this dismissal mooted the motion to dismiss for improper venue.
Having received the District Court's opinion, the Court now addresses the improper venue objection.
Venue is set out in 28 U.S.C. § 1408:
Except as provided in section 1410, a case under title 11 may be commenced in the district court for the district — (1) in which the domicile, residence, principal place of business in the United States, or principal assets in the United States, of the person or entity that is the subject of such case have been located for the one hundred and eighty days immediately preceding such commencement, or for a longer portion of such one-hundred-and-eighty-day period than the domicile, residence, or principal place of business, in the United States, or principal assets in the United States, of such person were located in any other district; or (2) in which there is pending a case under title 11 concerning such person's affiliate, general partner or partnership.
Bankruptcy Rule 1014 provides:
If a petition is filed in an improper district, on timely motion of a party in interest and after hearing on notice to the petitioners, the United States trustee, and other entities as directed by the court, the case may be dismissed or transferred to any other district if the court determines that transfer is in the interest of justice or for the convenience of the parties.
Due to the objection filed by the United States as to improper venue, the Court has two choices:
1. Dismissal;
2. Transfer to another district.
Inasmuch as the Debtors have indicated that they are not going to file the tax returns, there would be little benefit in transferring the case to another bankruptcy court. Without having the amount of the tax claims, the Court would be unable to determine the amount necessary to complete a plan.
Accordingly, the bankruptcy case of Nicholas M. Taflan and Patricia L. Taflan is DISMISSED and it is SO ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to the parties in interest.