Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

506 F.3d 956

Docket No. 06-55361.

Khaligh v. Hadaegh

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Oct. 15, 2007.*

Filed Nov. 8, 2007.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 2007-11-08

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2019

2 counsel of record

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 523

Relies on Khaligh v. Hadaegh (In Re Khaligh)

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-11-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Simon J. Dunstan, Hughes & Dunstan, LLP, Woodland Hills, CA, for the appellant.

¶2Paul A. Beck, Law Offices of Paul A. Beck, Sherman Oaks, CA, for the appellee.

¶3*957Before: FERDINAND F. FERNANDEZ and KIM MeLANE WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and RANER C. COLLINS,… District Judge.

¶6ORDER

¶7Shahzad Khaligh appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s determination 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 confirmed arbitration award decision.

¶8We 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 (9th Cir.BAP 2006).

¶9AFFIRMED.

/506/f3d/956 · .json · Public domain