Bortis

Bortis v. Burd

Good Law
34 F. App'x 523
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 2002No. 00-35753; D.C. No. CV-00-00258-JCCCalifornia494 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Moise and Marius Bortis appeal the district court’s affirmation of the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of their action for reimbursement in quantum meruit against David and Gina Burd. Appellants complain that the bankruptcy court erred in concluding that they acted as volunteers under Washington law and, therefore, were not entitled to reimbursement. Finding no reversible error we affirm.

Before us is a dispute between adjoining property owners who entered into an agreement to subdivide the property for development into residential lots. Appellants directed construction of a road on the extreme north edge of the property, forcing Appellees either to re-size or reduce the number of their lots. Because of the location of the road Appellees declined to sign the final plat agreement. Appellants responded by suing for reimbursement of expenses under the theory that Appellees were unjustly enriched by the construction of the road. The bankruptcy court found that Appellants acted as volunteers and, therefore, were not entitled to the reimbursement sought. The district court affirmed on identical grounds.

The sole issue presented herein is whether the bankruptcy court erred…

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.