Winterton v. Blue Pine Group, Inc. (In Re Blue Pine Group, Inc.)

Good Law
526 F. App'x 768
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 20, 201311-60059California438 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellants David Winterton and David J. Winterton & Associates, Ltd., (“Winter-ton”) appeal from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) im posing sanctions against Winterton based on his work in a bankruptcy case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we review decisions of the bankruptcy court independently without deference to the BAP’s conclusions. In re Su, 290 F.3d 1140, 1142 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm the bankruptcy court’s decision to impose sanctions but reduce the sanction award to $11,000.

A bankruptcy court may impose sanctions under Bankruptcy Rule 9011 when it finds that a filing is frivolous. Marsch v. Marsch (In re Marsch), 36 F.3d 825, 829 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam). A petition is frivolous if it is “both baseless and made without a reasonable and competent inquiry.” In re Grantham Bros., 922 F.2d 1438 , 1442 (9th Cir.1991) (internal quotation marks omitted). The record shows that Winterton filed and continued to pursue a bankruptcy petition without adequate investigation that it was legitimate, even after he was put on notice that his clients lacked authority to file. The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by…

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.