From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Kelly

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 25, 1996
100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir. 1996)

Opinion

No. 95-15931

Argued and Submitted September 19, 1996 — San Francisco, California

Filed November 25, 1996

William A. Kent, Irvine, CA, for appellant.

Howard S. Nevins and Thomas Griffin, Jr., Hefner, Stark Marois, LLP, Sacramento, CA, for appellee.

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Volinn, Ollason, and Russell, Judges Presiding

BAP No. EC-94-02064-RoV

Before: Robert R. Beezer and David R. Thompson, Circuit Judges, and Helen Gillmor, District Judge.


ORDER

On August 30, 1994, the bankruptcy court entered an order that a state court judgment debt owed by the debtor/appellee Thomas M. Kelly to the appellant Chris Okoye was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit (the BAP), in a published opinion, reversed. Kelly v. Okoye (In re Kelly), 182 B.R. 255 (Bankr. 9th Cir. 1995).

The issue in this appeal is whether collateral estoppel applies to preclude Kelly from asserting, in Okoye's adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy court, that the state court judgment debt did not result from any willful or malicious injury to Okoye.

We hold that collateral estoppel is inapplicable, and affirm the BAP's reversal of the bankruptcy court's judgment for the reasons given by the BAP in its published opinion.

The BAP is AFFIRMED. The judgment of the bankruptcy court is REVERSED. This case is remanded to the BAP for remand to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings consistent with the BAP's published opinion.


Summaries of

In re Kelly

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 25, 1996
100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir. 1996)
Case details for

In re Kelly

Case Details

Full title:In re THOMAS M. KELLY, Debtor. CHRIS OKOYE, Appellant, v. THOMAS M. KELLY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 25, 1996

Citations

100 F.3d 110 (9th Cir. 1996)

Citing Cases

Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Lake (In re Lake)

Importantly, "[a]ny reasonable doubt as to what was decided by a prior judgment should be resolved against…

Zuckerman v. Abel (In re Zuckerman)

Mr. Abel needed only to introduce a "record sufficient to reveal the controlling facts and pinpoint the exact…