Roos

Roos v. Red

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 4th 870·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1029·2005 Daily Journal DAR 7899·30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 446·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5743
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 28, 2005B173506California6,849 words

Opinion

Opinion

Woods, J.

Eric Red appeals from a judgment entered upon a verdict in favor of respondents, Nilda Roos and Wilma Baum, on their respective complaints against Red for wrongful death. Before trial respondents filed a motion in limine requesting the court apply the doctrine of collateral estoppel to factual findings made by the federal bankruptcy court in a discharge proceeding involving the parties. The bankruptcy court specifically found respondents’ wrongful death claims were not discharged by Red’s petition for bankruptcy because the claims were the result of Red’s willful and malicious conduct. The trial court here granted the motion in limine, and thus, precluded Red from contesting the issue of liability on the wrongful death claims in front of the jury. On appeal Red claims the trial court erred in giving the bankruptcy court’s findings collateral estoppel effect because doing so: (1) violated a federal bankruptcy statute ( 28 U.S.C. § 1411 ), which preserved his right to a jury trial on wrongful death claims; and (2) did not comport with fairness and sound public policy. We disagree. Red has not convinced us 28 United States Code section 1411 precludes the application of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.