In Re Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency Marcella Cossio, Debtors, Christopher W. Cate v. Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency

56 F.3d 70, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19903, 1995 WL 266890
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 5, 1995
Docket94-55331
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 56 F.3d 70 (In Re Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency Marcella Cossio, Debtors, Christopher W. Cate v. Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency) 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 Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency Marcella Cossio, Debtors, Christopher W. Cate v. Larry Cossio, D/B/A Cossio Insurance Agency, 56 F.3d 70, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19903, 1995 WL 266890 (9th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

56 F.3d 70
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Larry COSSIO, d/b/a Cossio Insurance Agency; Marcella
Cossio, Debtors,
Christopher W. CATE, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Larry COSSIO, d/b/a Cossio Insurance Agency, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 94-55331.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 2, 1995.*
Decided May 5, 1995.

Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Larry Cossio, the bankruptcy debtor, appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel ("BAP") affirming the bankruptcy court's denial of his motion to vacate a default judgment against him and to dismiss the underlying complaint based on defective service of process. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 158(d) and affirm for the reasons stated in the BAP's opinion filed on January 24, 1994. 163 B.R. 150 (9th Cir. BAP 1994).

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

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

Related

Flores v. Safadi (In Re Safadi)
431 B.R. 478 (D. Arizona, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 F.3d 70, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19903, 1995 WL 266890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-larry-cossio-dba-cossio-insurance-agency-mar-ca9-1995.