Papadakis

Papadakis v. Zelis (In re Zelis)

Good Law
66 F.3d 205·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 26045·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7281
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 15, 1995No. 94-15073California2,301 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hug, J.

Appellant, Bruce Zelis, appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s determination that two sanctions orders against Zelis were nondischargeable debts under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(6). For the reasons explained below, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

We review de novo the bankruptcy court’s grant of summary judgment. In re Bullion Reserve of North America, 922 F.2d 544, 546 (9th Cir.1991).

FACTS

In 1974, the Papadakises invested in a partnership with appellant, Zelis, and another partner, Day. In 1979, the Papadakises sued Zelis for wrongful conduct while acting as general partner. In 1986, Zelis and the Papadakises entered into a settlement agreement whereby Zelis stipulated to entry of judgment against him if he breached the agreement. Zelis apparently breached the agreement and the Papadakises sued and obtained a judgment in the stipulated amount. Zelis appealed.

The Papadakises filed a motion to dismiss on December 20,1990. Zelis responded with a 20-page opposition brief. The California Court of Appeal issued an Order to Show Cause why, given his stipulation to the terms of the judgment against him,…

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.