Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Steve SEDGWICK, Appellant, v. Leonard M. SHULMAN; et al., Appellees.
MEMORANDUM **
Steve Sedgwick appeals pro se the district court's order affirming the bankruptcy court's order denying him relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) and reclosing his Chapter 11 case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. On appeal from the district court, we independently review the bankruptcy court's decision. In re Gilman, 887 F.3d 956, 963 (9th Cir. 2018). The bankruptcy court's ruling on a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from an order or judgment is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Id. We affirm the district court's order.
The bankruptcy court properly exercised its discretion in concluding, based on its independent review of the record, the report of the Chapter 11 Trustee, and the report of the United States Trustee, that the record did not establish fraud or fraud on the court by Sedgwick's former bankruptcy counsel. See Latshaw v. Trainer Wortham & Co., 452 F.3d 1097, 1104 (9th Cir. 2006) (party seeking relief under Rule 60(b)(6) must show fraud involving an unconscionable plan or scheme designed to improperly influence the court).
The bankruptcy court properly exercised its discretion in declining to expand the scope of its inquiry beyond the specific fraudulent scheme alleged by Sedgwick. See In re Gilman, 887 F.3d at 963.
Sedgwick waived his constitutional arguments by failing to raise them before the bankruptcy court. See In re EPD Inv. Co., 821 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th Cir. 2016) (issue not presented to bankruptcy court was waived). In addition, he has made no showing of a denial of due process because the bankruptcy court afforded him generous opportunities to present his claims of fraud and fraud on the court. See In re Rains, 428 F.3d 893, 903 (9th Cir. 2005) (due process requires an opportunity to be heard).
AFFIRMED.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 18-56021
Decided: December 19, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)