Are findings of fact and conclusions of law required? Answer, sort of.

Nice quote from a district court memorandum I am reading.

Appellant does argue that the Bankruptcy Court was required to render findings of fact and conclusions of
law as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a), citing Rediger Investment Corporation v. H
Granados Communications, Inc. (In re H Granados Communications, Inc.)
, 503 B.R. 726, 732 (B.A.P. 9th
Cir. 2013). But that authority itself demonstrates that “[w]here the bankruptcy court rules without
articulating its findings, . . . there is no reversible error where the record provides the reviewing court with
a full, complete, and clear view of the issues on appeal” and that a “[r]eview of the record suffices when it
contains clear references to the factual basis supporting the bankruptcy court’s ultimate conclusions.” Id. at
732-33. This is the case here. This Court has no difficulty in understanding why the Bankruptcy Court
ruled in the way it did. As such, any failure by the Bankruptcy Court to follow the dictates of Rule 52(a) is
not reversible error.

Leave a Reply

× 1 = five