Claycomb
Claycomb v. Ulrich
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Kristin Claycomb appeals pro se the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying Claycomb’s motion to reconsider its decision to reopen her chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding to administer a personal injury settlement. Clay-comb also appeals the BAP’s dismissal of her appeal from the bankruptcy court’s orders awarding fees. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review cases appealed from the BAP de novo. Staffer v. Predovich (In re Staffer), 306 F.3d 967, 970-71 (9th Cir.2002). We independently review the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law de novo and its factual findings for clear error. Id. at 971 . We affirm.
Claycomb’s contention that the personal injury settlement was not part of the bankruptcy estate lacks merit. Personal injury claims constitute property under 11 U.S.C. § 541 (a)(1). See Sierra Switchboard Co. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 789 F.2d 705 , 709 (9th Cir.1986). It is immaterial that Claycomb did not file a personal injury suit in state court until after her bankruptcy proceeding had closed because her personal injury claim arose from an automobile accident that occured prior to the…