Opinion
22-1535
12-22-2022
In re: BAO-TRAN X. NGO, Debtor. v. BAO-TRAN XUAN NGO, Defendant-Appellant. CACI, INC.-FEDERAL, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Steven B. Ramsdell, TYLER, BARTL &RAMSDELL, P.L.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Stephen E. Leach, HIRSCHLER FLEISCHER, PC, Tysons, Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: December 20, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-01025-CMH-TCB)
ON BRIEF:
Steven B. Ramsdell, TYLER, BARTL &RAMSDELL, P.L.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant.
Stephen E. Leach, HIRSCHLER FLEISCHER, PC, Tysons, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Bao-Tran Xuan Ngo appeals the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's determination that attorney's fees, costs, and expenses awarded to CACI, Inc. -Federal in arbitration were nondischargeable in Ngo's bankruptcy. She contends that the bankruptcy court erred by giving collateral estoppel effect to the arbitrator's findings that she acted in a "fiduciary capacity" and that she inflicted a "willful and malicious injury."
"In reviewing the judgment of a district court sitting in review of a bankruptcy court, we apply the same standard of review that was applied by the district court." Copley v. United States, 959 F.3d 118, 121 (4th Cir. 2020). Thus, "we review the bankruptcy court's legal conclusions de novo, its factual findings for clear error, and any discretionary decisions for abuse of discretion." Id. With these standards in mind, we have reviewed the record submitted on appeal and the arguments of the parties and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order upholding the bankruptcy court's determination that the arbitrator's award of attorney's fees, costs, and expenses is a nondischargeable debt in Ngo's bankruptcy case. See CACI, Inc.- Fed. v. Ngo, No. 1:21-cv-01025-CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.