In re 'SAI Soledad Energy Inc.

Full title: In re: SAI SOLEDAD ENERGY, INC., Debtor. v. SAI SOLEDAD ENERGY, INC.…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 28, 2001

5 F. App'x 650 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

5 Fed.Appx. 650 (9th Cir. 2001) In re: SAI SOLEDAD ENERGY, INC., Debtor. USBC Manager, Miscellaneous, James R. Grube, Miscellaneous, Axel Johnson Energy Development, Inc., Creditor-Appellee, v. SAI SOLEDAD ENERGY, INC., Debtor-Appellant, and Linda Ekstrom Stanley, Trustee. No. 99-16753. D.C. No. CV-99-20118-JW PVT. BKCY No. BK-99-57598-JRG. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. February 28, 2001

Argued and Submitted February 14, 2001.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, James Ware, District Judge, Presiding.

Before B. FLETCHER, FERNANDEZ, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^*

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

SAI Soledad Energy, Inc., appeals the district court's decision, which reversed the determination of the bankruptcy court that SAISE had not breached its contract with Axel Johnson Energy Development, Inc. We reverse the district court.

We, of course, must review the decision of the bankruptcy court without deference to the decision of the district court. See Preblich v. Battley, 181 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir.1999). With all due respect to the district court, we affirm the bankruptcy court's determination for the reasons set forth in its excellent and thorough order of February 4, 1999, which sustained SAISE's objections to AJED's claim. ¹

1 SAISE's motion dated January 12, 2000, to supplement the record on appeal is denied.

Page 651.

REVERSED. ²

2 Of course, our reversal of the district court's order acts as an affirmance of the bankruptcy court's decision.