Citigroup

Hoskins v. Citigroup, Inc. (In Re Viola)

Good Law
583 F. App'x 669
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 16, 201412-60032; BAP 11-1173California497 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Janina Hoskins, the chapter 7 trustee of the estate of Joseph John Viola, seeks partial review of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) opinion affirming the bankruptcy court’s order-dismissing the trustee’s second -amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The trustee seeks review only of the lower court’s determination that defendants were not “initial transferees” under 11 U.S.C. § 550 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and, after de novo, review, we affirm. See Dennis v. Hart, 724 F.3d 1249, 1252 (9th Cir.2013); Boyajian v. New Falls Corp. (In re Boyajian), 564 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir.2009).

In this circuit, a “transferee” is one who has legal title to the funds and the ability to use them as the recipient sees fit. This is called the “dominion test.” Universal Serv. Admin. Co. v. Post-Confirmation Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Incomnet Commc’ns Corp., (In re Incomnet, Inc.), 463 F.3d 1064, 1071 (9th Cir.2006). We decline to apply a different test, as suggested by the trustee, because she fails to establish that this court’s existing rule is clearly irreconcilable with subsequent authority. See…

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.