You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Fikrou v. First Nationwide Mortgage Corp.

Citation: 32 F. App'x 473Docket: No. 00-17323, NC-00-01194-RYGR

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; April 15, 2002; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Guetatchew Fikrou appeals the dismissal of his bankruptcy court adversarial actions 98-5268 and 00-5251 by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP). The BAP's dismissal is subject to review under 28 U.S.C. 158(d). The appellate court independently reviews the BAP's decision and reviews the bankruptcy court's findings of fact for clear error and conclusions of law de novo. The appeal regarding adversarial proceeding 98-5268 is affirmed based on the reasons outlined in the BAP's order dated October 17, 2000. For adversarial proceeding 00-5251, the court lacks jurisdiction as the order is not final. The motion filed on March 19, 2001, by Milpitas Realty, MISCO, Inc., and Homeowners RCC, Inc. is denied. The decision is affirmed in part and dismissed in part, with a note that this disposition is not for publication and may not be cited in future cases except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's Decision

Application: The appellate court affirms the BAP's dismissal of adversarial proceeding 98-5268 based on the reasons provided in the BAP's order.

Reasoning: The appeal regarding adversarial proceeding 98-5268 is affirmed based on the reasons outlined in the BAP's order dated October 17, 2000.

Appellate Review under 28 U.S.C. 158(d)

Application: The appellate court reviews the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's decision independently and examines the bankruptcy court's findings of fact for clear error and conclusions of law de novo.

Reasoning: The appellate court independently reviews the BAP's decision and reviews the bankruptcy court's findings of fact for clear error and conclusions of law de novo.

Denial of Post-Appeal Motions

Application: The motion filed on March 19, 2001, by Milpitas Realty, MISCO, Inc., and Homeowners RCC, Inc. is denied.

Reasoning: The motion filed on March 19, 2001, by Milpitas Realty, MISCO, Inc., and Homeowners RCC, Inc. is denied.

Finality Requirement for Appellate Jurisdiction

Application: The court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal of adversarial proceeding 00-5251 because the order is not considered final.

Reasoning: For adversarial proceeding 00-5251, the court lacks jurisdiction as the order is not final.

Unpublished Dispositions and Citation Rules

Application: The court notes that the decision is not for publication and may not be cited in future cases except as permitted by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reasoning: The decision is affirmed in part and dismissed in part, with a note that this disposition is not for publication and may not be cited in future cases except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.