Banayan

Banayan v. Mesbahi

Good Law
212 F. App'x 598
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 8, 2006No. 05-56860California784 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Khanbaba Banayan and Parirokh Banayan (Banayan) appeal from the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) in favor of pro se debtor Shahram Mesbahi. The BAP affirmed the dismissal by the bankruptcy court of Banayan’s complaint seeking nondischargeability, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a), of Banayan’s judgment against Mesbahi. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we affirm.

*600 We review de novo all decisions of the BAP. In re Johnston, 21 F.3d 323, 326 (9th Cir.1994). “This is so because both the BAP and the court of appeals apply the same standard of review to the underlying judgment of the bankruptcy court.” Id. Thus, we review the bankruptcy court’s finding of fact for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo. Id. The bankruptcy court’s evidentiary rulings are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. In re Kim, 130 F.3d 863, 865 (9th Cir.1997). The parties are familiar with the background facts, which are in dispute, and are familiar with the prior proceedings.

A. Dischargeability

Banayan contends that he carried his burden of proving dischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 523 (a)(2), (4), and (6).

Under § 523(a)(2), debts…

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.