Ehrenberg

Ehrenberg v. Roussos (In re Roussos)

Good Law
2015 Bankr. LEXIS 4024·541 B.R. 721·61 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 248
United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 25, 2015Case Nos.: 2:15-bk-21624-ER and 2:15-bk-21626-ER (jointly administered); Adv. Nos.: 2:15-ap-01404-ER and 2:15-ap-01406-ERCalifornia7,364 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Robles, J.

AMENDED MEMORANDUM OF DECISION DENYING MOTIONS TO DISMISS

At issue is whether a 21-year old bankruptcy sale may be set aside for fraud on the court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(3), even in the absence of specific allegations that the fraud reduced the sales price. *725 The fraud alleged here was so serious as to prevent the judicial machinery from performing “in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Anand v. CITIC Corp. (In re Intermagnetics Am., Inc.), 926 F.2d 912, 916 (9th Cir.1991). The Chapter 7 Trustee’s Complaint to vacate the sale for fraud on the court states a claim upon which relief can be granted, and the motions to dismiss are denied.

I. Facts

In the early 1980s, August Michaelides partnered with Theodosios Roussos (“Theodosios”) and Harry Roussos (“Harry”) 3 (collectively, the “Roussos Brothers”) to purchase two apartment buildings in the greater Los Angeles area: (1) a 20-unit building located at 2727-2741 Abbott Kinney Boulevard, Venice, CA (“Abbot Kinney Property”) and (2) a 30-unit building located at 153 San Vicente Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA (“San Vicente Property”) (collectively, the “Properties”).…

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.