Vincent Torres v. the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash
This text of 599 F. App'x 650 (Vincent Torres v. the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash) 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
MEMORANDUM **
Vincent Torres appeals pro se from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order denying his request for sanctions against the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1): We review independently the bankruptcy court’s decision without deference to the district court’s determinations. Cossu v. Jefferson Pilot Sec. Corp. (In re Cossu), 410 F.3d 591, 595 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Torres’s motion for sanctions after concluding that the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians did not act in bad faith by filing a proof of claim in Torres’s bankruptcy proceedings. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 55, 111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27 (1991) (standard of review); Knupfer v. Lindblade (In re Dyer), 322 F.3d 1178, 1196 (9th Cir.2003) (for a court to use its inherent sanctioning power, there must be an *651 explicit finding of bad faith or willful misconduct).
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
599 F. App'x 650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vincent-torres-v-the-santa-ynez-band-of-chumash-ca9-2015.