Judge Mae D’Agostino
The U.S. Attorney audited Zebrowski’s January 2011 bankruptcy petition. On April 4, as part of the audit, Zebrowski executed an affidavit of non-ownership of a 2007 trailer, which he in fact owned in January 2009, within two years of his petition. Zebrowski, his wife, and Verni testified before the bankruptcy court. At cross-examination, Zebrowski explained the false statement in his affidavit, claiming to believe that the affidavit had referred to another, older trailer, that he once owned. Despite the opportunity to do so, trustee Dribusch did not elicit further testimony from Zebrowski. Verni testified that the trailer was transferred to him in July 2010. Recalled to the stand, Zebrowski testified that the trailer was transferred to Verni in December 2009. Bankruptcy court’s Oct. 25, 2012, ruling denied Dribusch’s objection to discharge, and dismissed the adversary proceeding. Dribusch had not proved the element of knowledge needed to sustain his 11 USC §727(a)(4)(A) cause of action. District court affirmed bankruptcy court’s Oct. 25, 2012, order. It gave “due regard” to bankruptcy court’s determination that no evidence was elicited that discredited Zebrowski’s explanation. Nothing in the record suggested that such determination was clearly erroneous.
