Bianco

Bianco v. Erkins

Good Law
84 F. App'x 945
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 24, 2003Nos. 02-35219, 02-35261; D.C. No. MC-00-05065-BLW/LMBCalifornia598 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Intervenors-Appellants (“Intervenors”) joined the underlying execution proceeding to prevent Plaintiff-Appellee (“Bianco”) from selling several pieces of artwork that Intervenors allege they own. The artwork was seized by a U.S. Marshal at Bianco’s direction on June 22, 2000 and was sold at a foreclosure auction to satisfy a judgment against the Intervenors’ parents, Robert and Bemardine Erkins (“the Erkins”).

The district court found that the Intervenors had actual and constructive notice that Bianco seized the artwork, and that the Intervenors’ claims that the property was exempt from execution were foreclosed by the Intervenors’ failure to timely file a required claim of exemption within fourteen days of seizure. See Idaho Code § 11-203 (2003). The Intervenors contend that their due process rights were violated because Bianco did not adhere to the notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code §§ 8-507 and 8-507A. The Intervenors seek a reversal of the district court’s ruling and ask us to “declare the levy and seizure of their property interests void and direct the [district court] to order appellee and its agents to relinquish and return their property or to…

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.