Reiff

Reiff v. Neilson

Good Law
33 F. App'x 878
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 16, 2002No. 00-56740; BAP No. CC-00-01450-PMaMoCalifornia654 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant-debtor Cathryn Reiff challenges an order of the bankruptcy court. The order allocated separate property assets to pay administrative claims, classified claims as either community property or separate property claims, authorized payments to some creditors (including Appellant’s ex-husband pursuant to a court-approved settlement), and authorized payment of a tax lien to the IRS. The bankruptcy appellate panel dismissed the appeal, citing Appellant-debtor’s lack of standing to contest that order. This timely appeal followed.

We review for clear error decisions on standing in a bankruptcy case. Duckor Spradling & Metzger v. Baum (In re P.R.T.C., Inc.), 177 F.3d 774, 777 (9th Cir.1999). If no factual finding was made below as to a debtor’s insolvency, we may determine the issue if all the relevant facts and evidence are available. McClellan Fed. Credit Union v. Parker (In re Parker), 139 F.3d 668, 670 (9th Cir.1998).

Because bankruptcy cases tend to implicate the interests of many, we have developed a prudential standing requirement in such cases called the “person aggrieved” test. P.R.T.C., 177 F.3d at 777 . Stated simply, only “person[s] aggrieved” by an…

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.