Khaligh v. Hadaegh

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: November 7, 2007
• Docket: 06-55361
• Status: Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In Re: SHAHZAD KHALIGH,  Debtor. No. 06-55361 SHAHZAD KHALIGH, Appellant,  BAP No. CC-05-01148-KPaB v. ORDER FRED HADAEGH, Appellee.  Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Klein, Pappas, and Brandt, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted October 15, 2007* Pasadena, California

Filed November 8, 2007

Before: Ferdinand F. Fernandez and Kim McLane Wardlaw, Circuit Judges, and Raner C. Collins,** District Judge.

COUNSEL

Simon J. Dunstan, Hughes & Dunstan, LLP, Woodland Hills, California, for the appellant.

*The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). **The Honorable Raner C. Collins, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

14673 14674 IN RE: KHALIGH Paul A. Beck, Law Offices of Paul A. Beck, Sherman Oaks, California, for the appellee.

ORDER

Shahzad Khaligh appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s deter- mination that Fred Hadaegh’s award of damages obtained against her was not dischargeable. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). She argues that mutual collateral estoppel is not available in California when the prior determination was made in a con- firmed arbitration award decision.

We disagree and, therefore, affirm for the reasons cogently set forth in the majority opinion of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. See Khaligh v. Hadaegh (In re Khaligh), 338 B.R. 817 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006).

AFFIRMED. PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.