United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re Atwood (2003)

    We are presented in this appeal with one facet of the problem of how a creditor's bankruptcy-related charges are to be determined for purposes of fixing the "reasonable fees, costs, or charges" allowable under § 506(b)[2] or the amount necessary to cure a default under § 1322(b). This procedural issue often appears, as in this instance, in small (less than $1,000) bites, but may have multi-million dollar ramifications. Neither the Bankruptcy Code nor the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. NV-02-1230-BKBu. Bankruptcy No. 01-33415-GWZ
  2. In Re Veal (2011)

    Kevin Hahn of Malcolm Cisneros argued for Appellees American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-3 Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-3, and its successors and/or assignees.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP Nos. AZ-10-1055-MkKiJu, AZ-10-1056-MkKiJu (Related Appeals)
  3. In Re Menk (1999)

    The debtor-appellant lost the trail when he misunderstood what it means to reopen a closed bankruptcy case. Now he is mired in a poorly-explored jurisdictional swamp involving the relationship of 28 U.S.C. § 1334(a) to § 1334(b) and the difference between bankruptcy "cases" and bankruptcy "civil proceedings."


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. SC-98-1816-KRyB. Bankruptcy No. 95-14067. Adversary No. 97-90319
  4. In Re Arnold (2000)

    In this case we explain the clear difference between two alternative grounds for disallowance of debtors' untimely claim of exemptions: bad faith, and prejudice to third parties. We stress the need for concrete evidence of bad faith, and reiterate that delay alone is not bad faith, and that prejudice, once ameliorated, is not a basis to deny a claim of exemption.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. CC-99-1480-MOPB. Bankruptcy No. LA 96-15706-BR
  5. In Re Lam (1997)

    Tam Ly and Mai Thi Lam ("Debtors") appeal an order of the bankruptcy court denying their request for entry of a default judgment against Investor's Thrift ("Thrift"), and an order dismissing the Debtor's adversary proceeding. We reverse and remand.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. NC-96-1773-HRyO, Bankruptcy No. 94-57338 JRG, Adversary No. 95-5398
  6. In Re Weinberg (2009)

    Appellants Richard E. Oney ("Oney") and his spouse, Erin K. Cox Oney, commenced an adversary proceeding against chapter 7[1] debtors Steven Marc Weinberg ("Weinberg")[2] and spouse Dana Gretty Weinberg seeking a determination that their claim against Weinberg was excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(2)(A), (4) and (6). The bankruptcy court ruled in favor of Oney under § 523(a)(4) and in favor of Weinberg under § 523(a)(2) and (6). Oney appealed, challenging the amount the bankruptcy court [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. AZ-08-1281-PaDMo. Bankruptcy No. 02-14058-RTB. Adversary No. 02-01391-RTB
  7. In Re Ransom (2007)

    In this interlocutory appeal, we face another interesting issue of statutory construction under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA"), this time concerning § 707(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I).[2] Specifically, in calculating the projected disposable income of an above-median income debtor for purposes of chapter 13 plan confirmation, we must determine whether § 707(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) permits the debtor to deduct a vehicle ownership expense for a vehicle owned free and [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. NV-07-1254-DBaMo. Bankruptcy No. 06-11566-BAM
  8. In Re pW, LLC (2008)

    This appeal presents a simple issue: outside a plan of reorganization, does § 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code permit a secured creditor to credit bid its debt and purchase estate property, taking title free and clear of valid, nonconsenting junior liens? We hold that it does not.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. CC-07-1176-MkKuPa. Bankruptcy No. LA 06-16059 BB
  9. In Re Searles (2004)

    This is an appeal from a judgment denying the chapter 7 discharge of an individual and of her marital community for withholding from the trustee, and not scheduling interests in, community property that is property of the estate.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP. No. AZ-04-1173-KSB. Bankruptcy No. 01-16135-PHX-RTB. Adversary No. 02-00189
  10. In Re Ellsworth (2011)

    Doctor Jessica Ellsworth, M.D., and Kenneth Ellsworth (jointly, the "Ellsworths") appeal the bankruptcy court's order granting the motion of Lifescape Medical Associates, P.C. ("Lifescape") to dismiss the Ellsworths' chapter 13[1] bankruptcy case with prejudice. The Ellsworths have not established that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion in dismissing their case with prejudice, nor have they established that any of the bankruptcy court's key findings supporting that dismissal were [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. AZ-10-1253-MkMaD. Bankruptcy No. 07-00986-CGC
  11. In Re Heath (2005)

    Debtors Philip and Marlene Heath ("Debtors") object that several holders of their credit card debt ("Creditors") did not attach sufficient documentation to their proofs of claim to comply with Rule 3001(c).[1] Debtors argue that the claims must be disallowed as a matter of law. We join numerous other courts which have discouraged this form of objection and disagree.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. CC-04-1324-MoBMa, Bankruptcy No. ND 03-10028-RR
  12. In Re Gertsch (1999)

    The bankruptcy court granted summary judgment, finding plaintiff's state court judgment nondischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code[1]. We AFFIRM, but vacate the judgment in part and remand for clarification that the bankruptcy court's judgment is not an independent money judgment, but merely a determination that the state court's judgment is excepted from discharge.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. CC-98-1288-BKMe. Bankruptcy No. LA 96-53197-SB. Adversary No. LA 97-02452-SB
  13. In Re Chaussee (2008)

    In this appeal, the Panel is called upon to decide an issue of first impression in our circuit: whether the act of filing a proof of claim in a bankruptcy case may, alone, subject the claimant to liability for violation of state and federal fair debt collection laws.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. WW-08-1114-PaJuKa. Bankruptcy No. 07-11392-KAO. Adversary No. 07-01266-KAO
  14. In Re Honkanen (2011)

    Marcella Honkanen ("Honkanen") appeals a memorandum decision holding her liable for fraud while acting in a fiduciary capacity under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4).[2] Honkanen raises three issues on appeal: 1) whether the bankruptcy court erred in determining that the "fiduciary capacity" requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) was satisfied, 2) whether the bankruptcy court erred in determining that the requirements for application of the doctrine of issue preclusion were satisfied, and 3) whether [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. EC 10-1102-ZJuMk. Bankruptcy No. 08-26680. Adversary No. 08-02469
  15. In Re Kashani (1995)

    Appellants, Mir Kazem Kashani and Habibeh S. Kashani ("Debtors" or "Appellants"), appearing pro se,[2] appeal from an order entered March 30, 1994 by the Honorable John J. Hargrove, of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California, which denied the Appellants' request to sue the Chapter 11 Trustee, Radmila A. Fulton ("Trustee" or "Appellee"), in either the state or federal courts in California. For the reasons set forth hereinafter, WE AFFIRM IN PART, REVERSE IN [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. SC-94-1389-CJO. Bankruptcy No. 89-6798-H11
  16. In Re Associated Vintage Group, Inc. (2002)

    The question is whether confirmation of a chapter 11 liquidating plan terminated the ability to recover an avoidable preference from a creditor. The analysis implicates principles of res judicata and of equitable or judicial estoppel. The answer depends on the terms of the plan and the dynamics of the process of confirming it.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. NC-01-1418-KRyB. Bankruptcy No. 99-13853-AJ-11
  17. In Re Hagel (1995)

    The bankruptcy court ruled that social security disability payments are included in determining disposable income which must be paid to creditors under a Chapter 13 plan. The court denied plan confirmation and dismissed the debtors' bankruptcy case.


    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP Nos. MT-94-2072-MeHaMa, MT-94-2404-MeHaMa. Bankruptcy No. 94-10300-13
  18. In Re Jodoin (1997)

    Plaintiff-Appellee Christine Samayoa, formerly Jodoin ("Plaintiff"), filed a complaint (the "Complaint") against Defendant-Appellant Douglas Jodoin, M.D. ("Defendant") under Bankruptcy Code (the "Code")[1] § 523(a)(15) seeking to have a state court marital dissolution judgment for $44,082 (the "Judgment") declared nondischargeable. After a trial on the merits of the Complaint, the bankruptcy court held that the Judgment was nondischargeable under Code §§ 523(a)(5) and (a)(15). Defendant [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. EC-96-1514-RyOH, Bankruptcy No. 94-29190-C-7, Adv. No. 95-2135-C
  19. In Re Mwangi (2010)

    As part of its standard, national procedures, each night Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") runs a computerized comparison of all newly filed Chapter 7[1] bankruptcy cases against its list of account holders. Upon discovering that Appellants had filed a chapter 7 petition, Wells Fargo "froze" Appellants' accounts and sent a letter to the chapter 7 trustee, seeking instructions as to disbursement of the funds. No directions were forthcoming from the trustee. The debtors, claiming 75% of the [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. NV-09-1408-DHPa. Bankruptcy No. 09-24057-BAM
  20. In Re Friedman (1991)

    Appellant/debtor Jack Friedman invested in Texas real estate over a period of five years with the assistance of appellee real estate brokers. Friedman became indebted to appellees on a debt secured by a deed of trust to Friedman's real property. Appellees recorded the deed of trust five months after its execution. Appellant filed his Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition nine months after the recordation, and sought to avoid the trust deed lien as a preferential transfer to an insider. The trial court [...]

    Court: United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Docket: BAP No. CC-90-1312-VOJ, Bankruptcy No. LA 87-08173-LF and Adv. No. LA 87-02177-LF

1 of 109 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5