Anice Plikaytis v. Fairmont L.P.

Good Law
670 F. App'x 597
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 201614-56408California531 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Anice Plikaytis appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining the objections of Fairmount L.P. and Debra Roth in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings of Roth Management Corporation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review de novo a district court’s decision on appeal from a bankruptcy court. In re JTS Corp., 617 F.3d 1102, 1109 (9th Cir. 2010). We review a bankruptcy court’s decision independently, without deference to the district court’s decision. Id. We review the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. Id. We affirm.

A writing is ambiguous if it is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation. See Woods v. Carey, 722 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2013). The bankruptcy court found that the key language from the state court judgment regarding the alter ego status of James Roth, Roth Management Corporation, and Roth Construction Corporation was unclear because it arguably includes several permutations of liability, including one permutation (reverse veil piercing) that is not available under California law, See In re Schwarzkopf, 626 F.3d 1032, 1038 (9th…

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.