In Re: C. Dean Ferren Sue S. Ferren, Debtors, C. Dean Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. McPherson Elec. Co., Inc. Strother-Wilbourn Land Title Co. North Little Rock Winnelson Co. Charles Hicks, Doing Bus. as Budget Print Searcy Physical Therapy Clinic McClain Heating & Air Ken Dick & Assocs., Inc., 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2000). · Go Syfert
In Re: C. Dean Ferren Sue S. Ferren, Debtors, C. Dean Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. McPherson Elec. Co., Inc. Strother-Wilbourn Land Title Co. North Little Rock Winnelson Co. Charles Hicks, Doing Bus. as Budget Print Searcy Physical Therapy Clinic McClain Heating & Air Ken Dick & Assocs., Inc., 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
43 citation events (39 in the last 25 years) across 25 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In re Isaacs (bap6, 2017-07-03) · Strongest negative: Evelyn Lawrence v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado (bap10, 2015-08-05)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Evelyn Lawrence v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado
10th Cir. BAP · 2015 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
But cf. In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2000). 38 Order, 517 B.R. at 256 . 39 Melnor, Inc. v. Corey (In re Corey), 583 F.3d 1249, 1251 (10th Cir. 2009). -13- inconsistent decisions, encourage reliance on adjudication.”40 Pursuant to the full faith and credit statute,41 in order to determine the preclusive effect of a state court judgment, a federal court must refer to the preclusion law of the state in which such judgment was rendered.42 Here, Colorado law controls the effect of the divorce court’s orders.
discussed Cited "but see" Long v. CVS CAREMARK CORP.
N.D. Ohio · 2010 · signal: but see · confidence high
See also In Re Pavelich, 229 B.R. 777, 781-83 (9th Cir.BAP 1999) (a federal bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to collaterally attack an erroneous state court construction of a bankruptcy discharge because it is void ab ini *643 tio under 11 U.S.C. § 524 (a)(1)); but see Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 559-560 (8th Cir.2000) (holding a bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction to review a state court decision interpreting a bankruptcy discharge).
cited Cited "but see" Haas v. Wisconsin
7th Cir. · 2004 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir.2000) (declining to create exception).
cited Cited "but see" Arkansas Chronicle v. Easley
E.D. Va. · 2004 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 , 560 (8th Cir.2000) (declining to create a void ab initio exception to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine). 19 .
cited Cited "but see" CBC Bricks Inc v. Schmitt, Sandra L.
7th Cir. · 2003 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 , 560 (8th Cir. 2000) (declining to create exception).
cited Cited "but see" Kim Schmitt, Gerard Smetana, Cbc Bricks, Inc., and Dennis Taheny v. Sandra Schmitt
7th Cir. · 2003 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 , 560 (8th Cir.2000) (declining to create exception).
cited Cited "but see" Schmitt v. Schmitt
N.D. Ill. · 2001 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 , 560 (8th Cir.2000) (declining to create void ab initio exception to Rooker-Feldman but noting split among bankruptcy appellate panels).
cited Cited "but see" In Re Cruz
Bankr. S.D.N.Y. · 2000 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
But cf. Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir.2000); Sin *812 gleton v. Fifth Third Bank (In re Singleton), 230 B.R. 533 (6th Cir. BAP 1999).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re Isaacs
6th Cir. BAP · 2017 · confidence medium
Rev. 905 (January, 2010). 5 The author of the article notes that the “Eighth Circuit gives great deference to state courts,” Cf. Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir. 2000), “while the Ninth Circuit grants almost no such deference,” citing Gruntz v. County of Los Angeles (In re Gruntz), 202 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Camil Kreit v. Christopher Quinn
5th Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
Ohio (In re Singleton), 230 B.R. 533, 538 (6th Cir. BAP 1999) (same) and Lake v. Capps (In re Lake), 202 B.R. 751, 758 (9th Cir. BAP 1996) (same), with Schmitt v. Schmitt, 324 F.3d 484, 487 (7th Cir. 2003) (“acknowledgting]” but “not endorsing]” the void ab initio exception) and Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 559-60 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (declining to create a void ab initio exception to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine when a state court allegedly interfered with bankruptcy court jurisdiction) and Casale v. Tillman, 558 F.3d 1258, 1261 (11th Cir. 2009) …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Herman Eugene Paulson (2×) also: Cited "see"
Bankr. D.S.D. · 2016 · confidence medium
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 284 (2005) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine is confined to cases brought by a state-court loser complaining of injuries caused by the state court); Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir. 2000); Car Color & Supply, Inc. v. Raffel (In re Raffel), 283 B.R. 746, 748-49 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2002) (history and application of Rooker-Feldman doctrine). . . . .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hamilton v. Herr
6th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir.2000) (“In our present case, the state court determined that the judicial liens had not been discharged during federal bankruptcy proceedings.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) James Stewart Hamilton v. Alicia Hamilton Herr
6th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir. 2000) (“In our present case, the state court No. 07-6269 Hamilton v. Herr Page 7 determined that the judicial liens had not been discharged during federal bankruptcy proceedings.
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Re Burns
Bankr. E.D. Mo. · 2004 · confidence medium
Feiren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam).
cited Cited "see" Caldwell v. DeWoskin
Bankr. E.D. Mo. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559 , 560 (8th Cir.2000) and Singleton v. Fifth Third Bank of W.
discussed Cited "see" Thomas Cawley v. Frank Celeste
8th Cir. BAP · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Company (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (specifically rejecting an exception to Rooker-Feldman that would permit a lower federal court to collaterally attack an erroneous state court construction of a bankruptcy discharge that was void ab initio under 11 U.S.C. § 524 (a)(1)). 4 State courts have concurrent jurisdiction to consider bankruptcy issues arising from chapter 11 cases.
discussed Cited "see" Cawley v. Celeste (In Re Athens/Alpha Gas Corp.)
8th Cir. BAP · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Company (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (specifically rejecting an exception to Rooker-Feldman that would permit a lower federal court to collaterally attack an erroneous state court construction of a bankruptcy discharge that was void ab initio under 11 U.S.C. § 524 (a)(1)).
cited Cited "see" Robert J. Blackwell v. Ronald Lurie
8th Cir. BAP · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Ferren, 227 B.R. 279, 282 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 1998), aff’d, Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. ( In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2000).
discussed Cited "see" Siskin v. Complete Aircraft Services, Inc. (In Re Siskin)
Bankr. E.D.N.Y. · 2001 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir.2000) (affirming lower court and agreeing with the reasoning of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit in Singleton that state court determination that bankruptcy order staying sale of the debtor’s personal property did not apply to other property of the debtor is not subject to collateral attack by a federal court because no exception to Rooker-Feldman applies). 3 This Court subscribes to the viability of Rooker-Feldman in this situation especially, where a State Court has issued a contempt order.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Flanders v. Lawrence (In Re Flanders)
10th Cir. · 2016 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 559-60 (8th Cir. 2000); In re Candidus, 327 B.R. 112, 119 (Bankr.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Flanders v. Lawrence (In re Flanders)
Bankr.D. Colo. · 2014 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir.2000), In re Toussaint, 259 B.R. 96 (Bankr.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Homer-Radtke v. Associated Mortgage, Inc. (In Re Homer-Radtke)
Bankr. N.D. Ill. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 203 F.3d 559, 560 (8th Cir.2000).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Keeler v. Academy of American Franciscan History, Inc. (In Re Keeler)
D. Maryland · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also In re Ferren, 203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir.2000) (bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction under Rooker-Feldman to void a state court de-cisión).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re: C. Dean Ferren Sue S. Ferren, Debtors, C. Dean Ferren
v.
Searcy Winnelson Company McPherson Electric Company, Inc. Strother-Wilbourn Land Title Company North Little Rock Winnelson Company Charles Hicks, Doing Business as Budget Print Searcy Physical Therapy Clinic McClain Heating and Air Ken Dick & Associates, Inc.
99-1178.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Mar 10, 2000.
203 F.3d 559
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published

203 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2000)

In re: C. Dean Ferren; Sue S. Ferren, Debtors,
C. Dean Ferren, Appellant,
v.
Searcy Winnelson Company; McPherson Electric Company, Inc.; Strother-Wilbourn Land Title Company; North Little Rock Winnelson Company; Charles Hicks, doing business as Budget Print; Searcy Physical Therapy Clinic; McClain Heating and Air; Ken Dick & Associates, Inc., Appellees.

No. 99-1178

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Submitted: January 6, 2000
Decided: February 11, 2000
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
Denied March 10, 2000

Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit.

Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

C. Dean Ferren initiated an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy court seeking to recover the proceeds from the foreclosure and sale of certain real estate which had been disbursed by the Arkansas Chancery Court to satisfy judicial liens against Ferren. He argued to the bankruptcy court, as he had to the Chancery Court, that his bankruptcy had discharged the liens. The bankruptcy court dismissed the action, and the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Ferren appeals.

2

We agree with the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel that Rooker-Feldman bars Ferren's action. If the bankruptcy court were to entertain Ferren's adversary proceeding, it would necessarily be reviewing the lien-discharge argument already rejected by the Arkansas Chancery Court, and in order to grant Ferren the relief he seeks, the bankruptcy court would have to effectively void the Arkansas Chancery Court's decision. Under Rooker-Feldman, the bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction to do so. See Fielder v. Credit Acceptance Corp., 188 F.3d 1031, 1034-35 (8th Cir. 1999).

3

We note that the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit has taken the opposite view in its decision in In Re Pavelich, 229 B.R. 777, 781-83 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1999) (a federal court has jurisdiction to collaterally attack an erroneous state court construction of a bankruptcy discharge because it is void ab initio under 11 U.S.C. §524(a)(1)), but we specifically reject its view of the applicability of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Instead, we agree with the reasoning of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit in its decision in In Re Singleton, 230 B.R. 533 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. 1999) (state court determination that bankruptcy order staying sale of debtor's personal property did not apply to other property of the debtor is not subject to collateral attack by a federal court because no exception to Rooker- Feldman doctrine applies). In our present case, the state court determined that the judicial liens had not been discharged during federal bankruptcy proceedings. In our view, Ferren's only remedy at that point was to appeal within the state courts of Arkansas, because the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to overturn the state court judgment and we decline to create an exception to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

4

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.