Fikrou v. Derham-Burk

Ninth Circuit

Fikrou v. Derham-Burk

32 F. App'x 494

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 15, 2002

DocketNo. 01-15160, NC-00-01106-RYGR; BAP No. NC-00-01106-RyGR

StatusPublished

This text of 32 F. App'x 494 (Fikrou v. Derham-Burk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fikrou v. Derham-Burk, 32 F. App'x 494 (9th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Guetatchew Fikrou appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in his adversary action, which challenged the transfer of property. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We independently review the BAP decision. See United States v. Battley (In re Kimura), 969 F.2d 806, 810 (9th Cir.1992). We review for clear error the bankruptcy court’s findings of fact, and we review de novo its conclusions of law. See id. We affirm for the reasons stated in the BAP’s memorandum disposition filed December 20, 2000.

Fikrou’s remaining contentions are without merit.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

**

Guetatchew Fikrou appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in his adversary action, which challenged the transfer of property. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We independently review the BAP decision. See United States v. Battley (In re Kimura), 969 F.2d 806, 810 (9th Cir.1992). We review for clear error the bankruptcy court’s findings of fact, and we review de novo its conclusions of law. See id. We affirm for the reasons stated in the BAP’s memorandum disposition filed December 20, 2000.

Fikrou’s remaining contentions are without merit.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 F. App'x 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fikrou-v-derham-burk-ca9-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack