Bostanian v. American Hilton Corp.

Citation: 41 F. App'x 66Docket: No. 01-56446; BAP No. CC-00-01720-BMoP

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; July 1, 2002; Federal Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

The memorandum reviews a decision from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) regarding Vartanoush Bostanian's claims of willful violation of the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(h). The BAP's decision is affirmed, employing a de novo review standard for legal conclusions and a clear error standard for factual findings.

Vartanoush alleges that Liberty Savings Bank willfully violated the automatic stay by submitting a misleading motion for relief that she claims referred only to Parcel B, despite the motion and the court order explicitly addressing all three properties, including Parcel A. The court finds no willful violation, noting Vartanoush was served with the motion and order, and her argument regarding Liberty’s intentions is rejected.

Additionally, Vartanoush contends that Liberty and California Federal Bank willfully violated the stay through a settlement agreement regarding Parcel A. The court determines that even if such a violation occurred, Vartanoush experienced no injury as the bankruptcy court abstained from the title dispute, and the property was reconveyed to the bankruptcy estate.

The court also applies the doctrine of laches, stating that Vartanoush's delay in bringing her claims was unreasonable given her awareness of the relevant court orders and agreements from 1994 and 1995. The delay raised a presumption of prejudice to Liberty and California Federal, which Vartanoush failed to rebut.

The decision concludes by affirming the BAP's ruling, noting the disposition is not publishable and cannot be cited in this circuit except as permitted by specific Ninth Circuit rules.