In the Matter of Los Angeles Land and Investments, Ltd., Debtor. Ralph S. Aoki, Trustee v. Laura C. Light, Claimant-Appellant

Ninth Circuit

In the Matter of Los Angeles Land and Investments, Ltd., Debtor. Ralph S. Aoki, Trustee v. Laura C. Light, Claimant-Appellant

447 F.2d 1366, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8045

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided September 16, 1971·No. 24740_1·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the district judge affirming (with one exception not here relevant) two orders of the referee in bankruptcy denying appellant’s claims in the reorganization proceeding and allowing a counterclaim by the reorganization trustee against appellant and two others. The underlying facts can be found in the decision of the district judge classifying creditors and stockholders of the debtor reported at 282 F.Supp. 448 (D.Hawaii 1968).

From a review of the record before us we cannot say that the decision of the district judge in light of the record and findings of the referee was “clearly erroneous.”

Without defining the nature of the claims asserted, we are unable to distinguish the present case from Alexander v. Hillman, 296 U.S. 222, 56 S.Ct. 204, 80 L.Ed. 192 (1935), which forecloses appellant’s arguments attacking the summary jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court,

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the district judge affirming (with one exception not here relevant) two orders of the referee in bankruptcy denying appellant’s claims in the reorganization proceeding and allowing a counterclaim by the reorganization trustee against appellant and two others. The underlying facts can be found in the decision of the district judge classifying creditors and stockholders of the debtor reported at 282 F.Supp. 448 (D.Hawaii 1968).

From a review of the record before us we cannot say that the decision of the district judge in light of the record and findings of the referee was “clearly erroneous.”

Without defining the nature of the claims asserted, we are unable to distinguish the present case from Alexander v. Hillman, 296 U.S. 222, 56 S.Ct. 204, 80 L.Ed. 192 (1935), which forecloses appellant’s arguments attacking the summary jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court,

The judgment is affirmed.

In the Matter of Los Angeles Land and Investments, Ltd., Debtor. Ralph S. Aoki, Trustee v. Laura C. Light, Claimant-Appellant, 447 F.2d 1366, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8045 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

447 F.2d 1366 (In the Matter of Los Angeles Land and Investments, Ltd., Debtor. Ralph S. Aoki, Trustee v. Laura C. Light, Claimant-Appellant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related