Wagstaff

Smith v. Wagstaff

Good Law
3 F. App'x 612
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 7, 2001No. 99-35211California795 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Paul Wagstaff appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment, whereby the bankruptcy court granted a motion brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) by Darlene Smith, Keith Powers, and Robert Malin (collectively “Smith”). Prior to Smith’s Rule 60(b) motion, on Smith’s motion for summary judgment, the bankruptcy court held, in relevant part, that a treble damages award for securities fraud is dischargeable. Before the time for appeal had run, however, the Supreme Court handed down a decision holding that a treble damages award is not dischargeable. See Cohen v. De La Cruz, 523 U.S. 213 , 118 S.Ct. 1212 , 140 L.Ed.2d 341 (1998).

After the time for appeal had run, Smith filed a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment in light of Cohen , and the bankruptcy court granted the motion. Wag-staff filed a timely appeal to the district court, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s judgment, holding that Smith is entitled to relief from judgment under the “excusable neglect” provision of Rule 60(b)(1) or, alternatively, under Rule 60(b)(6). We affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s decision on appeal from a bankruptcy court…

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.