In re Hurt

Ninth Circuit

In re Hurt

24 F.3d 246, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19007, 1994 WL 183396

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 12, 1994

Docket93-16515

StatusPublished

This text of 24 F.3d 246 (In re Hurt) 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

In re Hurt, 24 F.3d 246, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19007, 1994 WL 183396 (9th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

24 F.3d 246
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

In re Norma J. HURT, Debtor.
SUNWAY SYSTEMS, INC., Appellant,
v.
Milton G. PACE; Kachina Plywood, Inc.; Intermountain Wood
Products, Inc.; Robertson Wood Products, Inc.; Zeco, Inc.;
Nevada-West Systems, Inc.; Canco, Inc.; Perco, Inc.;
Norma J. Hurt, Appellees.

No. 93-16515.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted April 12, 1994.
Decided May 12, 1994.

Before: SKOPIL, NORRIS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges

ORDER*

Milton Pace's motion to allow filing of "Supplement To: Appellee's Brief" is denied.

The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel judgment, including sanctions, is affirmed for the reasons stated in its Memorandum Decision filed June 29, 1993.

AFFIRMED.

*

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

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