In re: Sorento on Yesler Owner, LLC; Yaminah Oddie-Johnson v.

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 In re: DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. C25-2217-JCC 10 SORENTO ON YESLER OWNER, LLC, APPEAL 12 Debtor. BANKRUPTCY COURT CASE NO. 13 24-13217-CMA YAMINAH ODDIE-JOHNSON, 14 ADV PROC. NO. 25-01081-CMA 15 Appellant, 16 v. 17 19 Appellees. 20

21 This matter comes before the Court on Ms. Yamina Oddie-Johnson’s appeal of the 22 Bankruptcy Court’s decision granting summary judgment to bankruptcy petitioner, Sorrento on 23 Yesler Owner, LLC’s (“Sorento”), on Ms. Oddie-Johnson’s claim in Sorrento’s chapter 11 24 proceeding (Dkt. No. 1.) Having thoroughly considered the briefing in this matter (Dkt. Nos. 8, 25 9, 11, 12) and record transmitted (Dkt. Nos. 6, 7, 12), the Court AFFIRMS the Bankruptcy Court 26 as explained herein. 1 Ms. Oddie-Johnson, who lodged a proof of claim in Sorento’s bankruptcy proceeding 2 (Dkt. No. 12 at 108–110), now appeals the Bankruptcy Court’s summary judgment ruling against 3 her (id. at 91–95) on a complaint Sorento filed with that court seeking to disallow Ms. Oddie- 4 Johnson’s claim on invalidity grounds (id. at 6–9). (See generally Dkt. No. 1.)1 The instant 5 appeal is a narrow one. Ms. Oddie-Johnson solely contends here that she was not properly served 6 with Sorento’s underlying summary motion and/or notice for the resulting hearing on that 7 motion, which was set before the Bankruptcy Court on October 23, 2025. (See Dkt. Nos. 8–10.) 8 This, says Ms. Oddie-Johnson, violated her due process rights. (Id.) As described below, the 9 argument is meritless. 10 District courts have jurisdiction to review a bankruptcy court’s decisions. 9 U.S.C. 11 § 16(a)(1)(A)–(B); 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1). This Court conducts de novo review of conclusions of 12 law, In re EPD Inv. Co., LLC, 821 F.3d 1146, 1150 (9th Cir. 2016), and findings of fact are 13 reviewed for clear error, Decker v. Tramiel (In re JTS Corp.), 617 F.3d 1102, 1109 (9th Cir. 14 2010). Thus, the Court accepts the Bankruptcy Court’s findings of fact unless “the court is left 15 with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Id. (quoting In re 16 Greene, 583 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir. 2009)). 17 Sorento, in response to Ms. Oddie-Johnson’s appeal here, points to record evidence that 18 Ms. Oddie-Johnson received full and adequate notice of its summary judgment motion to the 19 Bankruptcy Court and the resulting hearing, (see Dkt. No. 12 at 56–59, 104), along with Ms. 20 Oddie-Johnson opposition papers to that motion, which included her own notice of that same 21 hearing, (id. at 60–84). To satisfy due process, a debtor must provide notice that is “reasonably 22 calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action 23

24 1 In that ruling, the Bankruptcy Court found the following: Ms. Oddie-Johnson was a leaseholder in the Sorento Flats Apartments, owned by Appellee here, Sorento; Ms. Oddie-Johnson 25 fraudulently recorded a purported interest in that property to herself; and Ms. Oddie-Johnson then relied on that interest to assert an invalid claim in Sorento’s chapter 11 proceeding. (See 26 Dkt. No. 12 at 92–93.) 1 and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.” See Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank 2 & Tr. Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950). This evidence easily meets this standard, along with that 3 required under the bankruptcy rules for notice. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7005(b)(2)(C), (d)(1)(B); 4 BrR 9013-1(c)(3)(B), (e)(1). On this basis, the Court must affirm the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling, 5 given the nature of the question posed to this Court. (See Dkt. Nos. 1, 8, 9.) Although had Ms. 6 Oddie-Johnson raised the merits of the Bankruptcy Court’s invalidity determination more 7 generally, this Court would have affirmed that ruling as well, given the record presented. 8 For the foregoing reason(s), the Bankruptcy Court’s decision is AFFIRMED. This matter 9 is REMANDED to the Bankruptcy Court (as necessary). 10 11 DATED this 6th day of March 2025. A 12 13 14 John C. Coughenour 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26