From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Ioane

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 14, 2021
99-cv-21119-SW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)

Opinion

99-cv-21119-SW Bankruptcy Court 98-57226-SLJ

06-14-2021

In re Michael S. Ioane, Sr. Debtor.


ORDER DENYING PERMISSION TO FILE PURSUANT TO PRE-FILING ORDER

Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers United States District Court Judge.

Debtor Michael S. Ioane, Sr., acting pro se, filed a Motion to Reopen in his prior bankruptcy case, No. 98-57226-SLJ, seeking to present his arguments about a violation of the automatic bankruptcy stay pertaining to a nonjudicial foreclosure of real property (“the Blue Gum Property”) that occurred in August 1998.

On August 25, 2000, in the case of Michael and Shelly Ioane, and Paradise Solutions, v Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith, et al., Northern District of California No. 99-21119-SW, District Judge Spencer Williams dismissed the action therein and issued an Order to Show Cause on Plaintiffs Why the Sanction of Pre-Filing Review Should Not Be Granted. (Id. at Dkt. No. 167 [“the OSC”].) The OSC detailed many actions Mr. Ioane had undertaken in the district court, the state court, and the bankruptcy court concerning his loss of title to the Blue Gum Property.

On September 26, 2000, District Judge Spencer Williams entered an Order Imposing Sanction of Pre-Filing Review on Michael Ioane and Shelly Olson, aka Shelly Ioane (No. 99-cv-21119-SW, Dkt. No. 171 [“Prefiling Order”].) The Prefiling Order requires Mr. Ioane to obtain permission prior to filing any new lawsuit, including “every complaint, petition, application, or request he files in this district, ” except for those filed before the date of entry of the Prefiling Order. (Id. at 2 [“This Order does not apply to any lawsuit filed before September 26, 2000.”].)

Pursuant to the Prefiling Order, the Court Denies Mr. Ioane permission to file the Motion to Reopen. Notwithstanding its caption, Mr. Ioane's motion is a new adversary proceeding in a closed bankruptcy case, and therefore a new “complaint, petition, application, or request” filed after the issuance of the Prefiling Order.

The Court further notes that the bankruptcy court Order of April 8, 2021 issued by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen L. Johnson denied the motion to reopen on its merits notwithstanding

It Is So Ordered.


Summaries of

In re Ioane

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 14, 2021
99-cv-21119-SW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)
Case details for

In re Ioane

Case Details

Full title:In re Michael S. Ioane, Sr. Debtor.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jun 14, 2021

Citations

99-cv-21119-SW (N.D. Cal. Jun. 14, 2021)

Citing Cases

Rocha v. Fiedler (In re Fiedler)

We acknowledge that a prefiling review is not a common Rule 9011 sanction (prefiling orders are more…