Jones v. Cardoso

4 F. App'x 520
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 23, 2001
DocketNos. 00-55038, 00-55055; BAP Nos. CC-98-01425-BKT, CC-98-01428-BKT
StatusPublished

This text of 4 F. App'x 520 (Jones v. Cardoso) 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
Jones v. Cardoso, 4 F. App'x 520 (9th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

Yvonne B. Jones appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) decision affirming the bankruptcy court’s decision granting summary judgment to defendants in Jones’ adversary proceeding alleging violation of the automatic stay in her Chapter 13 bankruptcy. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d).

We review decisions of the BAP de novo and independently review rulings of the bankruptcy court. See Ardmor Vending Co. v. Kim (In re Kim), 130 F.3d 863, 865 (9th Cir.1997). We affirm the bankruptcy [521]*521court’s rulings for the reasons stated in the BAP’s Memorandum of September 10, 1999.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Ardmor Vending Co. v. Kim
130 F.3d 863 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 F. App'x 520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-cardoso-ca9-2001.