Rogers v. California Federal Bank

Good Law
11 F. App'x 840
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 2001No. 00-16683; BAP No. NC-99-01521-RKMaCalifornia597 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Julia Ann Rogers (“Rogers”) appeals from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) affirmation of the Bankruptcy Court, which had dismissed her complaint against California Federal Bank (“CalFed”) for failure to state a claim. Her complaint alleged conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, wrongful disclosure, conversion, abuse of process, and interference with contractual interest, all in connection with CalFed’s foreclosure on a property during an automatic stay that was retroactively annulled by the Bankruptcy Court. She claims on appeal that the Bankruptcy Court erred in annulling the automatic stay and that it lacked jurisdiction over the present complaint. We disagree and affirm the Bankruptcy Court’s dismissal of her claim.

*842 I. Revisiting the Annulment

Rogers asks this court to reconsider the Bankruptcy Court’s annulment and to reinstate the automatic stay. She argues that CalFed failed to establish the extreme circumstances that would justify a retroactive annulment, and that the doctrine of “clean hands” should have prevented CalFed from benefitting from the annulment.

The annulment of the stay is not properly before this 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.