Ozenne v. Chase Manhattan Bank (In Re Ozenne)

Good Law
841 F.3d 810·2016 WL 6608963·561 B.R. 810·63 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 85·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20204
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 201611-60039California2,692 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

This matter comes before the en banc court on an appeal, filed by Gary Ozenne, from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”). The BAP determined that it had jurisdiction to hear Ozenne’s petition for a writ of mandamus and then denied the petition. However, the BAP did not have jurisdiction to hear Ozenne’s petition. Mandamus was not available to Oz-enne because he filed the petition as a substitute for filing the timely appeal required by the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. Ozehne’s failure to file a timely appeal jurisdictionally barred the BAP from considering the petition for writ of mandamus.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A.Ozenne’s Initial Bankruptcy Petition

The history of this litigation is lengthy. This case—Ozenne’s fifth chapter 13 bankruptcy—-was filed on May 17, 2001, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. At that time, Chase Manhattan Bank, Ocwen Loan Servicing, and Ocwen Federal Bank FSB (“the Financial Institutions”) held and/or serviced a mortgage on Ozenne’s home, and they were scheduled to foreclose on the mortgage on May 17, 2001. However, Ozenne filed for bankruptcy that same day in an…

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.