.jpg)
Judge Neiter (CD Cal) bound by BAP? - becoming Absolute
This is what Judge Kwan said (highlighted for convenience),
"Regarding the issue of whether the 2005 Bankruptcy Code amendments
abrogated the absolute priority rule in Chapter 11 cases of individual
debtors ... the issue is currently before the Ninth Circuit in *In re
Zachary and Snorsky*, No. 13-16402 (9th Cir.) on direct appeal from the
Eastern California Bankruptcy Court. The briefing was completed on
December 4, 2013, but the appeal has not yet been set for oral argument.
The case law is divided. The Ninth Circuit BAP in a majority opinion
written by Judge Clarkson said yes with a dissent by Judge Jury in *In re
Friedman*, 466 B.R. 471 (9th Cir. BAP 2012) while the Fourth, Fifth and
Tenth Circuits have said no. *In re Maharaj*, 681 F.3d 558 (4thCir. 2012); *In
re Stephens*, 704 F.3d 1279 (10th Cir. 2013), *In re Lively*, 717 F.3d 406
(5th Cir. 2013). *The debtors/appellants have also requested the circuit
to hold that BAP opinions are binding on the bankruptcy **courts of** the
circuit, which the circuit has previously declined to hold.* See *Bankof Maui
v. Estate Analysis*, 904 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1990)."
Sincerely,
Michael Avanesian
Law Offices of David A. Tilem
www.tilemlaw.com
818-507-6000
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:23 PM, John Faucher wrote:
>
>
> APR is on appeal to the 9th Circuit in a case I had confirmed, Kerry S.
> Moriarty, 9:11-11059. The BAP issue isn't part of that appeal. Is APR on
> appeal in another case before the 9th Circuit?
> - John D. Faucher
> 818/889-8080
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jeffrey S. Shinbrot
> *To:* "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> *Cc:* "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 16, 2014 1:10 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] Judge Neiter (CD Cal) bound by BAP?
>
>
> I believe Judge Kwan mentioned that the BAP Issue is on appeal in the same
> case as the APR now in the ninth circuit
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 16, 2014, at 10:37 AM, "cdcbaa" wrote:
>
> No
>
> D
>
> Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503
> 310-328-1001-voice
> [image: cid:part1.03050307.05030101@bklaw.com]
>
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 2:48 PM, Alik Segal wrote:
>
>
> Listmates:
>
> Does Judge Neiter (CD Cal) consider bankruptcy courts bound by BAP
> decisions?
>
> Does anyone know?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Alik Segal
> Alik.Segal@gmail.com
> 310-362-6157
> California Central District
>
>
>
>
>
This is what Judge Kwan said (highlighted for convenience), "Regarding the issue of whether the 2005 Bankruptcy Code amendments abrogated the absolute priority rule in Chapter 11 cases of individual debtors ... the issue is currently before the Ninth Circuit in In re Zachary and Snorsky, No. 13-16402 (9th Cir.) on direct appeal from the Eastern California Bankruptcy Court. The briefing was completed on December 4, 2013, but the appeal has not yet been set for oral argument. The case law is divided. The Ninth Circuit BAP in a majority opinion written by Judge Clarkson said yes with a dissent by Judge Jury in In re Friedman, 466 B.R. 471 (9th Cir. BAP 2012) while the Fourth, Fifth and Tenth Circuits have said no. In re Maharaj, 681 F.3d 558 (4th of the circuit, which the circuit has previously declined to hold. See Bankof Maui v. Estate Analysis, 904 F.2d 470 (9th
The post was migrated from Yahoo.