Prestige Ltd. Partnership-Concord v. East Bay Car Wash Partners

Creditor East Bay Car Wash Partners (“East Bay”) timely appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting partial summary judgment in favor of debtor Prestige Limited Partnership-Concord (“Prestige”) in Prestige’s adversary proceeding against East Bay. East Bay’s primary contention here is that its attachment of Jerry Brassfield’s un-pledged assets in a separate state court action on the underlying obligation for breach of guaranty was not an “action” within the purview of Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 726(a). 1 The bankruptcy court held East Bay violated California’s “one action, security-first” rale by pursuing the state court action and attaching *1215 Brassfield’s unpledged assets, and thereby waived its security interest in Prestige’s ground lease under § 726(a). The district court affirmed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), 2 see In re Lyons, 995 F.2d 923, 924 (9th Cir.1993), and we adopt the statement of facts and reasons set forth in the bankruptcy court’s published opinion, In re Prestige Ltd. Partnership-Concord, 205 B.R. 427, 434-36 (Bankr.N.D.Cal.1997).

We supplement this by rejecting East Bay’s argument on appeal that…