Richard Taxe v. Carolyn Dye
This text of Richard Taxe v. Carolyn Dye (Richard Taxe v. Carolyn Dye) 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: KATHLEEN KELLOGG-TAXE, No. 18-60052
Debtor. BAP No. 17-1092
------------------------------ MEMORANDUM* RICHARD TAXE,
Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN A. DYE, Chapter 7 Trustee,
Appellee.
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Faris, Spraker, and Kurtz, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
Submitted December 11, 2019**
Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Richard Taxe appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment after a trial in an adversary
proceeding filed by the chapter 7 trustee in Kathleen Kellogg-Taxe’s bankruptcy
case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo the
bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law and for clear error its findings of fact.
Decker v. Tramiel (In re JTS Corp.), 617 F.3d 1102, 1109 (9th Cir. 2010). We
affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding that Taxe owned the
shares and assets of Dwarfco Productions, Inc. because the record supports the
bankruptcy court’s determination that Taxe controlled Dwarfco Productions, Inc.
The bankruptcy court properly concluded the shares and assets of Dwarfco
Productions, Inc. are the community property of Taxe and debtor Kathleen
Kellogg-Taxe, and thus those assets are property of the bankruptcy estate of
Kathleen Kellogg-Taxe. See Brace v. Speier (In re Brace), 908 F.3d 531, 537 (9th
Cir. 2018) (“Under California law, there is a general presumption that, absent a
statute to the contrary, all property acquired during marriage is community
property.”).
We reject as unsupported by the record Taxe’s contentions that the
bankruptcy court advocated in favor of the bankruptcy trustee and that the
bankruptcy court never ordered Taxe to turn over gemstones in his possession.
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
2 18-60052 appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
3 18-60052
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Richard Taxe v. Carolyn Dye, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-taxe-v-carolyn-dye-ca9-2019.