Jenks v. BP West Coast Products, LLC (In Re Friwat)
In the Matter Of: Josef S. FRIWAT, Dan Jenks, Appellant, v. BP West Coast Products, LLC; United Family, LLC; First American Title Company; J.F. Oil Company, LLC, Appellees
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Harry Pregerson (author), Raymond C. Fisher, Daniel
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In the Matter of: JOSEF S. FRIWAT, No. 11-56995 DAN JENKS, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01631-H-RBB Appellant, MEMORANDUM * v. BP WEST COAST PRODUCTS, LLC; UNITED FAMILY, LLC; FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY; J.F. OIL COMPANY, LLC, Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted May 9, 2013 Pasadena, California Before: PREGERSON and FISHER, Circuit Judges, and DANIEL, District Judge.** * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Colorado, sitting by designation. Appellant Dan Jenks challenges the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction over this case and its decision to dismiss Jenks’ complaint with prejudice. We affirm.
Jenks’ complaint challenges the validity of a bankruptcy court’s order authorizing the sale of real property. His case is related to the original bankruptcy case. Thus, federal jurisdiction exists and removal from state court was proper.
See McGuire v. United States, 550 F.3d 903, 911-12 (9th Cir. 2008) (“A civil proceeding is ‘related to’ a title 11 case if ‘the outcome of the proceeding could conceivably have any effect on the estate being administered in bankruptcy.’”
(quoting In re Fietz, 852 F.2d 455, 457 (9th Cir. 1988))). The bankruptcy court properly dismissed the complaint because Jenks impermissibly seeks to collaterally attack a final order of the bankruptcy court. See Travelers Indem. Co. v. Bailey, 557 U.S. 137, 148-54 (2009) (holding that, if a party or its predecessor in interest had an opportunity to challenge a bankruptcy court’s subject matter jurisdiction to issue an order, the party may not collaterally attack the order in subsequent proceedings).
AFFIRMED.