Summary
In Law, the trustee sought to surcharge (i.e. to treat as non-exempt) the debtor's exempt property in order to compensate the estate for costs incurred as a result of the debtor's bad faith litigation.
Summary of this case from Harbinger Capital Partners LLC v. Ergen (In re LightSquared Inc.)Opinion
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. BAP No. 09-1077-PaMkH. Pappas, Markell, and Hollowell, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding.
STEPHEN LAW, Litigation in pro se, Appellant, Pro se, Chino, CA.
For ALFRED H. SIEGEL, Chapter 7 Trustee, Appellee: Steven Todd Gubner, I, Esquire, Attorney, EZRA BRUTZKUS GUBNER LLP, Woodland Hills, CA.
Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Stephen Law, a Chapter 7 debtor, appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (" BAP" ) order affirming the bankruptcy court's orders surcharging Law's homestead exemption and imposing discovery sanctions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo the bankruptcy court's conclusions of law and for clear error its factual findings. Latman v. Burdette, 366 F.3d 774, 781 (9th Cir. 2004). We review for an abuse of discretion the imposition of discovery sanctions. Freeman v. San Diego Ass'n of Realtors, 322 F.3d 1133, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm. The BAP properly affirmed the bankruptcy court's order granting the trustee's surcharge motion because the surcharge was calculated to compensate the estate for the actual monetary costs imposed by the debtor's misconduct, and was warranted to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy process. See Latman, 366 F.3d at 786 (recognizing inherent power of bankruptcy courts to equitably surcharge a debtor's exemption to protect integrity of the bankruptcy process and to ensure that debtor does not exempt amount greater than allowed under Bankruptcy Code); see also Onubah v. Zamora (In re Onubah), 375 B.R. 549, 556 (9th Cir. BAP 2007) (a surcharge should be calculated to compensate the estate for the actual monetary costs imposed by the debtor's misconduct).
The BAP properly affirmed the bankruptcy court's order imposing discovery sanctions on Law, in light of Law's refusal to comply with the trustee's permissible discovery requests in a contested matter. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014 (Bankruptcy Rules 7028-7037 apply in contested matters); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7030 (permitting depositions as outlined in Fed.R.Civ.P. 30); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7034 (providing for requests for production of documents as outlined in Fed.R.Civ.P. 34).
Law's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.