Arcadia Bankruptcy Attorney

Trustee
Bankruptcy | Case Law | Trustee

TRUSTEES

In re Harris, 590 F.3d 730 (9th Cir. 2009)

Bankruptcy court had “arising in” jurisdiction over an action against a chapter 7 trustee

alleging breach of a postpetition settlement agreement, since the claim could not exist

independently of a bankruptcy. Bankruptcy court erroneously dismissed this case under the Barton

doctrine. The case was filed against the trustee without seeking permission of the appointing court,

but was then removed to the appointing court. Thus, the Barton doctrine did not apply.

In re AFI Holding, Inc., 355 B.R. 139 (9th Cir. BAP 2006), aff’d and remanded, 530 F.3d 832 (9th

Cir. 2008)(for determination of removed trustee’s right to fees).

Chapter 7 trustee had a material conflict of interest and thus was not disinterested as

required by § 701(a)(1) where she previously represented insiders of the debtor. Totality of

circumstances test applied. Failure to disclose all connections and appearance of inpropriety also

supported her removal from the case.

In re Crown Vantage, Inc., 421 F.3d 963, 970 (9th Cir. 2005)

Under the Barton doctrine, “a party must first obtain leave of the bankruptcy court before it

initiates an action in another forum against a bankruptcy trustee or other officer appointed by the

bankruptcy court for acts done in the officer’s official capacity.”

In re American Eagle Mfg., Inc., 231 B.R. 320 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1999)

Otherwise-valid Chapter 7 trustee election could not be set aside under procedural rule

requiring motion for election certification no later than 10 days after creditor’s meeting. Rule

2003(d) is invalid.

In re Giordano, 212 B.R. 617 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1997), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 202 F.3d 277 (9th

Cir. 1999)

Bankruptcy trustee entitled to derived judicial immunity absent showing of dishonesty or

bad faith.

In re Kashani, 190 B.R. 875 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1995)

1. Leave of court must be obtained before trustee may be sued in any court other than

appointing court

2. No abuse to require debtors to attach a proposed complaint to their motion for leave.