George

George v. City of Morro Bay (In re George)

Good Law
298 F.3d 1160·2002 WL 1869612
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 15, 2002Nos. 01-56445, BAP-CC-00-01598-PMOBRCalifornia1,701 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Debtors James and Margie George contend that the bankruptcy court did not have jurisdiction to dismiss their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 takings claim, and that the dismissal was incorrect as a matter of law. The defendants, the City of Morro Bay and numerous city officials, move for attorneys’ fees and double costs for defending a frivolous appeal. We affirm the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s dismissal of all federal claims and award attorneys’ fees and double costs to the city defendants.

I

In 1987, debtors entered into a lease with the city for certain nonresidential real property. See In re George, 177 F.3d 885, 886 (9th Cir.1999). In 1994, debtors filed a petition for protection under Chapter 11. Id. at 887 . They did not assume or reject the lease of the property within 60 days of the petition, as required by 11 U.S.C. § 365 (d)(4). 2 Id. After the city moved for *1162 surrender of the property, debtors moved to assume the lease. The bankruptcy court granted the city’s motion for surrender and denied debtors’ untimely motion to assume. Id.

A number of appeals of that order ensued, the net result being that the bankruptcy court was upheld on all substantive issues. Relevant…

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.