Keenan

Keenan v. Pyle

Good Law
339 F. App'x 809
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 2009No. 08-55780California357 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

James W. and Judy L. Keenan appeal from a district court order affirming the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of their complaint in an adversary proceeding against the bankruptcy trustee for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because, inter alia, the trustee was protected by the doctrine of quasi-judicial immunity. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the district court’s determinations. Leichty v. Neary (In re Strand), 875 F.3d 854 , 857 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court properly determined that the trustee is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for the actions alleged in the complaint. See Curry v. Castillo (In re Castillo), 297 F.Bd 940, 946-47 (9th Cir.2002) (reviewing de novo the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law regarding immunity and stating that a “[tjrustee is immune for actions that are functionally comparable to those of judges, i.e., those functions that involve discretionary judgment”). Because we affirm dismissal on these grounds, we do not reach the arguments on appeal that concern alternative grounds for dismissal.…

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.