Jaffer v. Sharma (In re Sharma)
This text of 301 F. App'x 718 (Jaffer v. Sharma (In re Sharma)) 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.
Opinion
[719]*719MEMORANDUM
Rashida Jaffer, a California attorney, appeals pro se from the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing her adversary action for failure to comply with local bankruptcy rules and the bankruptcy court’s instructions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1). We review for abuse of discretion, Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128 (9th Cir.1987), and we affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action, with prejudice, after giving Jaffer multiple warnings and considering the factors set forth in Malone. Id.
Jaffer’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
Jaffer’s motion to augment the record is granted.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
301 F. App'x 718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jaffer-v-sharma-in-re-sharma-ca9-2008.