We hold that a constitutional objection based on Stern is not waivable because it implicates
separation‐of‐powers principles.
We also hold that the bankruptcy judge lacked constitutional
authority to enter a final judgment on the alter‐ego claim. In
authority to enter final judgment on the first four counts of the
adversary complaint, each of which were objections to the
discharge of Sharif’s debts. Finally, we hold that the entry of
default judgment and awarding of fees were proper sanctions
under the circumstances, though we remand for a recalculation
of fees.
Wellness International
No comments:
Post a Comment