From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zaharescu v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 30, 2015
601 F. App'x 534 (9th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 13-56338

04-30-2015

In re: ADINA ZAHARESCU, Debtor, ADINA ZAHARESCU, Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC; et al., Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 2:12-cv-09767-CAS MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California
Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding
Before: GOODWIN, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

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

Adina Zaharescu appeals pro se from the district court's decision affirming the bankruptcy court's dismissal of her adversary complaint alleging violations of state and federal law in connection with foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review independently the bankruptcy court's decision without deference to the district court's determinations. Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand), 375 F.3d 854, 857 (9th Cir. 2004). We may affirm the bankruptcy court's decision on any ground supported by the record. Olsen v. Zerbetz (In re Olsen), 36 F.3d 71, 73 (9th Cir. 1994). We affirm.

Zaharescu's claims based on appellees' alleged lack of authority to initiate foreclosure proceedings were properly dismissed because those claims were raised and decided on the merits, or could have been raised, in her prior district court action against the same defendants or their privies. See United States v. Liquidators of European Fed. Credit Bank, 630 F.3d 1139, 1150 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth elements of res judicata and factors for establishing identity of claims); Tahoe-Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency, 322 F.3d 1064, 1081 (9th Cir. 2003) ("[A] dismissal on statute of limitations grounds is a judgment on the merits.").

To the extent Zaharescu asserted claims based on appellees' alleged misuse of bankruptcy procedures, her claims are precluded by the Bankruptcy Code. See Miles v. Okun (In re Miles), 430 F.3d 1083, 1091 (9th Cir. 2005) (state law claims for bad-faith bankruptcy filings were precluded "[b]ecause Congress intended the Bankruptcy Code to create a whole scheme under federal control that would adjust all of the rights and duties of creditors and debtors alike"); MSR Exploration, Ltd. v. Meridian Oil, Inc., 74 F.3d 910, 916 (9th Cir. 1996) (Bankruptcy Code preempts debtor's action for malicious prosecution against creditor for alleged filing of invalid claims in bankruptcy proceedings).

We reject Zaharescu's contentions concerning the impact of her objection to proofs of claim filed in another bankruptcy proceeding, and her contention that she should have received an opportunity to conduct discovery.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Zaharescu v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 30, 2015
601 F. App'x 534 (9th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Zaharescu v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC

Case Details

Full title:In re: ADINA ZAHARESCU, Debtor, ADINA ZAHARESCU, Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 30, 2015

Citations

601 F. App'x 534 (9th Cir. 2015)

Citing Cases

Larkin v. Bank of Am., N.A. (In re Larkin)

906 F.2d 1468, 1476 (10th Cir.1990) (Successor trustee's breach of contract action against non-creditors to…