From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Law

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 14, 2009
308 F. App'x 152 (9th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 07-56239.

Submitted December 17, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed January 14, 2009.

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Pappas, Klein, and Alley, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding. BAP Nos. CC-06-01379-KPaA, CC-06-01427-KPaA.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Stephen Law, Chapter 7 debtor, and Lili Lin, a citizen of China and purported lien holder, appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") judgment affirming the bankruptcy court's orders approving a compromise agreement and authorizing distribution of real estate sale proceeds. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo the BAP's decision. See Arrow Elecs., Inc. v. Howard Justus (In re Kaypro), 218 F.3d 1070, 1073 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The BAP properly upheld the bankruptcy court's order approving the compromise agreement between the trustee and the judgment creditors, because the agreement was in the best interest of the creditors, interest holders, and the estate. See Fed.R.Bankr.P. 9019(a) (authorizing bankruptcy court to approve a compromise or settlement); Port O'Call Inv. Co. v. Blair (In re Blair), 538 F.2d 849, 852 (9th Cir. 1976) (per curiam) ("Liquidation is to be accomplished as rapidly as possible consistent with obtaining the best possible realization upon the available assets and without undue waste by needless or fruitless litigation.").

The BAP properly affirmed the order authorizing the trustee to distribute the property sale proceeds because it was conditioned on a judicial determination of Lili Lin's purported interest. See 11 U.S.C. § 363(e) ("The court . . . shall prohibit or condition . . . use, sale, or lease [of property] as is necessary to provide adequate protection" to an entity's interest in such property).

Appellants' remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Appellants' motion to file a late reply brief is granted. The Clerk shall file the brief received on April 10, 2008.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

In re Law

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 14, 2009
308 F. App'x 152 (9th Cir. 2009)
Case details for

In re Law

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Stephen LAW, Debtor, Lili Lin; Stephen Law, Appellants…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 14, 2009

Citations

308 F. App'x 152 (9th Cir. 2009)

Citing Cases

In re Law

In its many decisions issued over the years, the Panel has provided in great detail the facts surrounding…

In re Law

In its many decisions issued over the years, the Panel has provided in great detail the facts surrounding…