Perry v. Chase Auto Finance (In Re Perry)

Good Law
471 F. App'x 701
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 201209-60052California314 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Avram Moshe Perry, a Chapter 7 debt- or, appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s decision to abstain from considering Perry’s state law claims, and dismissing as moot Perry’s appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order denying Perry injunctive relief and granting Chase Auto Finance stay relief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review for an abuse of discretion the bankruptcy court’s abstention decision. Siragusa v. Siragusa (In re Siragusa), 27 F.3d 406, 407-08 (9th Cir.1994). We review de novo the BAP’s mootness determination. Nat’l Mass Media Telecomm. Sys., Inc. v. Stanley (In re Nat’l Mass Media Telecomm. Sys., Inc.), 152 F.3d 1178 , 1180 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by abstaining from deciding Perry’s unlawful repossession claims because Perry filed a nearly identical action for the repossession which was pending in state court. See In re Siragusa, 27 F.3d at 408-09 ; see also Benedor Corp. v. Conejo Enters., Inc. (In re Conejo Enters. Inc.), 96 F.3d 346 , 351 (9th Cir.1996) (bankruptcy court’s discretionary decision will be reversed only if…

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.