Evoq Properties, Inc. v. Richard Meruelo

Good Law
669 F. App'x 930
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 28, 201614-60063California690 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Richard Meruelo brought this action seeking severance pay after he was terminated as CEO and Chair of MMPI (which later became EVOQ). Following MMPI’s bankruptcy and subsequent confirmation of a reorganization plan, Meruelo’s action argued that his severance pay should be treated as an administrative expense. The bankruptcy court ruled that Meruelo did not have a substantive right to severance pay in contract or quantum meruit and denied his claim. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) concluded that the bankruptcy court erred by not treating Merue-lo’s claim as an administrative expense and applying the wrong standard for such a claim under 11 U.S.C. § 503 , but it did not address the threshold issue: whether Mer-uelo had a substantive right to severance pay. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we reverse and remand.

1. Jurisdiction

“We have jurisdiction to review final orders of the BAP under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d).” Scovis v. Henrichsen (In re Scovis), 249 F.3d 975, 980 (9th Cir. 2001). Although remand orders from the BAP are not ordinarily considered final, we take a “pragmatic” approach to finality in bankruptcy proceedings, given their “unique…

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.