Chase Investment Services Corp. v. Law Offices of Jon Divens & Associates, LLC

Good Law
491 F. App'x 793
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 6, 201210-56785California1,167 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-in-Interpleader Chase Investment Services Corp. (“Plaintiff’ or “CISC”) filed this interpleader action against, in part, (1) Jon Bivens (“Bivens”), (2) the Law Offices of Jon Bivens & Associates, LLC (“JBA”), (3) Betts and Gamble Investments, Inc. and Betts and Gambles Global Equities, LLC (collectively “Betts”), and (4) Amedraa, LLC (“Ame-draa”). These Defendants-in-Interpleader asserted, in part, conflicting claims to the interest earned on two of the collater-alized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) in a CISC securities brokerage account (“the Account” or “the CISC account”). The district court held a bench trial and awarded the interest earned on the CMOs to Betts and Amedraa. The district court found Bivens’s testimony to be “wholly incredible” and that “Bivens created a scheme to defraud [Betts] and Amedraa and to steal their assets.” Chase Inv. Services Corp. v. Law Offices of Jon Divens & Associates, LLC, 748 F.Supp.2d 1145, 1151 (C.D.Cal.2010).

In this appeal, Divens and JDA (together, “Divens”) take issue with the district court’s credibility determinations, three of its findings of fact, and three of its conclusions of law. Jurisdiction is proper…

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.