Polo Building Group, Inc. v. Rakita (In Re Shubov)
United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KLEIN, Bankruptcy Judge.
Appellants abused the power to issue federal civil subpoenas and were sanctioned under two rules ill-suited to the situation. We AFFIRM on the basis of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(1), which rule applies in bankruptcy and is specifically tailored to subpoena abuse.
Jurisdiction
The bankruptcy court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the sanctions motion as a “core proceeding” that it was empowered to hear and determine. 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(b) & 1334. The sanctions order is final because there is no on-going adversary proceeding or contested matter to which…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Roy Richard Dittman v. State of California State and Consumer Affairs Agency Medical Board of California Acupuncture Committee and Marilyn NielsenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Cunningham v. Hamilton CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Board of Education v. Farmingdale Classroom Teachers Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Barber v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- High Tech Medical Instrumentation, Inc. v. New Image Industries, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Miller v. Cardinale (In Re Deville)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Mount Hope Church v. Bash Back!Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- In Re Brooks-HamiltonUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Com-1 Info, Inc. v. Wolkowitz (In Re Maximus Computers, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Harris v. United States Trustee (In Re Harris)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.