Smyth

Smyth v. City of Oakland

Good Law
271 F. App'x 654
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 26, 2008Nos. 05-16407, 05-16409California3,423 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Attorney David Smyth was sanctioned $10,761 by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California (“bankruptcy court”) for filing a complaint initiating an adversary proceeding (the “Adversary Proceeding Complaint”) which the bankruptcy court determined was frivolous and was filed for an improper purpose. 1 The bankruptcy court also imposed a six-month suspension from practice in bankruptcy court on Smyth for filing a frivolous objection to a creditor’s proof of claim (the “Proof of Claim Objection”). We affirm in part and reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

The bankruptcy court imposed both sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9011. 3 We review all aspects of an imposition of sanctions for abuse of discretion. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 , 110 S.Ct. 2447 , 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990). 4 A court abuses its discretion in imposing sanctions where its determination that a filing is frivolous is based on “a materially incorrect view of the relevant law” or clearly erroneous findings of fact. Id. at 401-02 , 110 S.Ct. 2447 . A filing is frivolous if it is “both baseless and made without a…

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.