Charles Daff v. James Wallace

Good Law
606 F. App'x 318
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 11, 201513-60032California1,241 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Charles W. Daff, Chapter 7 Trustee (“Trustee”) challenges the bankruptcy court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees James Wallace, Rebecca Wallace, and Gloria Suess (“Judgment Creditors”) on their counterclaims for declaratory and injunctive rehef. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we affirm on the narrow basis that, despite her fraudulent transfer, Catherine Z. Cass (“Debtor”) retained an equitable interest in the Residence to which Judgment Creditors’ lien attached.

. As an initial matter, the doctrines of claim preclusion (res judicata) or issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) do not preclude Judgment Creditors from arguing that Debtor retained an equitable interest in the Residence. Under either California or federal preclusion law, a subsequent lawsuit must raise the same claim or issue as the prior lawsuit. Compare Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 48 Cal.4th 788, 797 , 108 Cal.Rptr.3d 806 , 230 P.3d 342 (2010) (discussing the elements of California claim preclusion and issue preclusion), with Littlejohn v. United States, 321 F.3d 915, 919-20, 923 (9th Cir.2003) (discussing the elements of federal claim preclusion and…

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.