Legal Opinion
Claycomb v. Ulrich
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 14, 2003No. 02-15871; BAP No. AZ-01-01283-PBKPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM**
Kristin Claycomb appeals pro se the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying Claycomb’s motion to reconsider its decision to reopen her chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding to administer a personal injury settlement. Clay-comb also appeals the BAP’s dismissal of her appeal from the bankruptcy court’s orders awarding fees. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review cases appealed from the BAP de novo. Staffer v. Predovich (In re Staffer), 306 F.3d 967, 970-71 (9th Cir.2002). We independently review the bankruptcy…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lawrence Hamilton v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, an Illinois Corporation David's Restaurant SupplyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- In the Matter of Harry Fondiller, Debtor. Rosalyn Fondiller v. Jerome E. RobertsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Cusano v. KleinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- In Re Andrew Staffer, Debtor, Andrew Staffer v. Robert PredovichCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Landmark Hotel & Casino, Inc. v. Local Joint Executive Board of Las Vegas Culinary Workers Union, Local No. 226 (In re Landmark Hotel & Casino, Inc.)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re CarrollUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · 2018