Skip to main content
Richard Gaines Heston
Avvo
Pro

Richard Heston’s Legal Cases

4 total

  • In re Beauchamp, 236 B.R. 727 (9th Cir.BAP 1999), affd. at 5 Fed.Appx. 743, (9th Cir. Mar 12, 2001)

    Practice Area:
    Bankruptcy & Debt
    Date:
    Mar 12, 2001
    Outcome:
    Plaintiff prevailed and was affirmed.
    Description:
    Debtor Robert Beauchamp, an attorney, aided by his attorney wife, attempted to conceal assets from creditor, his former father-in-law, and filed Chapter 7. After discovery of concealed funds secreted in an account held in his current wife's name, Plaintiff Clinton Hoose sucessfully objected to discharge. Debtor's last-minute disclosure of the funds while being pursued in discovery was held inadequate to purge the "taint" of wrongful concealment. Debtor's discharge was denied and affirmed on appeal to Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • In re Voelkel, 322 B.R. 138 (9th Cir.BAP 2005)

    Practice Area:
    Bankruptcy & Debt
    Date:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Outcome:
    Dismissal based on ineligibility reversed.
    Description:
    In a case pre-dating the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA), the bankruptcy court dismissed the debtor's Chapter 7 case as a substantial abuse based on her monthly expenses being excessive in the court's personal view, notwithstanding they were within the IRS's guidelines for tax payment plans. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appeals Panel reversed, holding that the court had failed to articulate objective standards for assessing the debtor's expenses and remanded. Within the year of the decision, Congress enacted BAPCPA, which codified the use of the IRS standards to determine debtor eligibility for Chapter 7 relief, a principle the Debtor had advocated. At its annual convention that year, the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's ranked the Voelkel decision as one of the top 10 most significant cases in 2005 effecting consumers' rights.
  • Burt v. County of Orange (2004)120 Cal.App.4th 273, 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 373, review den. Sept. 15, 2004

    Practice Area:
    Civil Rights
    Date:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Outcome:
    Dismissal of petition to review agency reversed
    Description:
    Catherine Burt, who suffered from severe migraine headaches for which her doctor prescribed injections of the drug demerol, called 911 when she feared her infant daughter may have been accidentally pricked by a needle, a fear that proved incorrect and the child had suffered no harm. Although the child was returned to the care and custody Burt, a pharmacist, and her husband, a decorated navy pilot, the county social services agency filed a report with the state's Child Abuse Central Index (CACI), classifying the incident as a substantiated report of child abuse or neglect, while denying Burt a hearing to challenge the determination. Burt sued the County of Orange to compel such a hearing, arguing she had a due process right to be heard before being listed in CACI, but the court denied the petition and dismissed. Burt appealed and the court of appeal reversed, directing the county to provide such a hearing using procedures devised by the trial court. As a result of the decision, Orange County has adopted hearing procedures to permit parents and others accused of neglect or abuse an opportunity to be heard before their names are added to the CACI, a repository of data made accessible to law enforcement and state licensing agencies. As a result of the Burt case, the California legislature has enacted laws insuring that all persons be granted a hearing to protect their due process rights before being added to the CACI list.
  • In re Ashworth, Slip Copy, 2012 WL 4596217 (Bkrtcy.C.C.Cal.)

    Practice Area:
    Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
    Date:
    Oct 01, 2012
    Outcome:
    Objection overruled. The Court criticized controlling Ninth Circuit rule and urged reconsideration and modification to avoid unjust application based on the facts of this case. Appeal is pending before the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.
    Description:
    Chapter 13 debtor objected to allowance of former spouse's claim as a disguised domestic support obligation, where the former spouse had remarried shortly after divorce and yet was collecting a 17-year stream of non-modifiable payments totaling $306,000 based on combined settlement of both divorce issues and a separate $10Million personal injury suit brought by the former spouse for spreading herpes-simplex virus.