Narrative Opinion Summary
Bob M. Cohen appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) decision, which upheld the bankruptcy court's denial of his “Motion for Further Enforcement of Settlement Agreement and Related Court Orders” and the imposition of sanctions against him. Cohen does not contest the factual findings of the bankruptcy court. The BAP's reasons for affirming the bankruptcy court's denial of the motion are accepted, and the court's imposition of sanctions is deemed not to constitute an abuse of discretion, as it was within the court's inherent authority. Additionally, the court will not consider other arguments related to sanctions presented by Cohen for the first time on appeal, citing precedent that such arguments are waived. The decision is affirmed and noted as not suitable for publication or citation in this circuit, per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Enforcement of Settlement Agreements in Bankruptcy Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The bankruptcy court's decision to deny a motion for further enforcement of a settlement agreement was upheld by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, and the decision is affirmed on appeal.
Reasoning: The BAP's reasons for affirming the bankruptcy court's denial of the motion are accepted, and the court's imposition of sanctions is deemed not to constitute an abuse of discretion, as it was within the court's inherent authority.
Publication and Citation of Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision in this case is noted as not suitable for publication or citation within the circuit according to circuit rules.
Reasoning: The decision is affirmed and noted as not suitable for publication or citation in this circuit, per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Sanctions in Bankruptcy Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Sanctions imposed by the bankruptcy court are affirmed as they fall within the court's inherent authority and do not constitute an abuse of discretion.
Reasoning: The court's imposition of sanctions is deemed not to constitute an abuse of discretion, as it was within the court's inherent authority.
Waiver of Arguments Not Raised in Initial Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Arguments related to sanctions that were not presented at the bankruptcy court level are considered waived and will not be addressed on appeal.
Reasoning: Additionally, the court will not consider other arguments related to sanctions presented by Cohen for the first time on appeal, citing precedent that such arguments are waived.