[00:00:00] Speaker 04: So I think we're ready to go and madam clerk, let's call the first case Take appearances, okay, go ahead you tell me now, okay? [00:00:24] Speaker 04: And you want to reserve some time [00:00:26] Speaker 02: uh... for for a lot of honors we're about about five minutes about five minutes okay alright go ahead we're going to get an appearance from mr rothman go ahead good morning your honors larry rossman for the appellee and i apologize for not being on video but i had eye surgery yesterday okay and it's up okay well i hope you're doing well okay so i'm sorry thank you your honor okay you bet okay so five minutes [00:00:55] Speaker 01: Rebellion, okay, you may proceed yes, sir, okay, thank you your honors I just want to put this case arises from a bankruptcy Court that seeking that was trying to seek protection from a civil action in a lawful detainer case Through discovery in the lawful detainer case we discovered that the append the the Respondent did not purchase a property nor did they have title to the property so Basically science of fact even though it presented to the court in a lawful detainer court [00:01:23] Speaker 01: They ignored my pleadings and issued a judgment in favor of the respondent. [00:01:29] Speaker 01: I was seeking bankruptcy protection to figure out how to adjudicate this case based on the abuse of discretion from the court. [00:01:38] Speaker 01: Upon doing so, the respondent filed a motion to leave the state. [00:01:44] Speaker 01: Judge Rizzolo pretty much violated my bankruptcy rights. [00:01:48] Speaker 01: By one, lifting a statement or a transcript short, I informed the court that the repellent did not have proof of purchase and they do not have title to the property. [00:01:59] Speaker 01: He also ignored my pleas, but he's still focusing more on discussing a case he had co-authored with an offending case. [00:02:09] Speaker 01: Mr.. Rizolo went to extreme prejudice to deny me that also the 14-day stay he checked off on box to deny me that and Further went further went to his check off box number 14 Where he states and I quote here? [00:02:23] Speaker 01: Is for the order that movement it is authorized to regain position of moments properly pursuant to the ruling of in reference to Smith despite the finding of this and any other bankruptcy petition I [00:02:35] Speaker 01: So he pretty much stopped me without even considering my pleadings. [00:02:39] Speaker 01: And if you look at the transcripts, he did not even, he just said, okay, thank you, no consideration whatsoever. [00:02:43] Speaker 03: So Mr. Solano, I have a question. [00:02:47] Speaker 03: Yes. [00:02:49] Speaker 03: You started this argument with telling us that there had been an unlawful detainer action in state court that had proceeded. [00:02:58] Speaker 03: And it had proceeded to a judgment. [00:03:00] Speaker 01: Yes. [00:03:01] Speaker 03: Did you appeal the judgment? [00:03:03] Speaker 01: I am in the process of doing so. [00:03:05] Speaker 03: So there has not been a final determination on the appeal? [00:03:07] Speaker 03: No. [00:03:09] Speaker 03: The unlawful detainer action was commenced by Orange Kangaroo? [00:03:13] Speaker 03: Yes. [00:03:14] Speaker 03: And it was based upon their claim that they had ownership of the property and a trustee's deed? [00:03:21] Speaker 01: Yes. [00:03:23] Speaker 03: And that's what you challenged in front of the state court? [00:03:27] Speaker 04: I did. [00:03:29] Speaker 03: And it was based upon [00:03:30] Speaker 01: The judgment that the Bankruptcy Court found that there was a colorable claim for the lender for orange kangaroo right despite short in fact in the end of an offer retainer action you're allowed to challenge the trustee did poncello and the court ignored I had seven pleadings they were all denied [00:03:50] Speaker 03: So will you also didn't you? [00:03:53] Speaker 03: Removed the unlawful detainer action at some point at the district court I did and the district court Remanded it back to the unlawful detainer court yes And you also removed the unlawful detainer action to the bankruptcy court in the bankruptcy court Didn't take any action like because I found an action to recuse a judge for her actions, okay [00:04:20] Speaker 01: 90 interim there's been a writ of possession radiation as could be executed any time So okay, I'm sorry Okay, so judges are Did not ask the respondent or any had any merit or anything of sort He ignored my opposition denied me due process in fact Mr.. Gisola made no findings of fact in his ruling which is required to do so and [00:04:50] Speaker 01: So I have five issues I want to bring up. [00:04:52] Speaker 01: The first one, again, as I mentioned earlier, under the Federal Rules Procedure, a contested motion for relief from that state requires the Federal Rules of Bankers Procedure 7052 that the court take evidence and issues, finance, or fact and conclusions of law, which he did not. [00:05:11] Speaker 01: The court ignored the equitable and positional interest in the property, continued the position of property, pay utilities, activating and challenging the title, [00:05:19] Speaker 01: and for the evoked protection under 11 USC 362. [00:05:24] Speaker 01: And the Ninth Circuit has ruled that, has held that when the debtor's mere positions of your property is protected, interest under the automatic state. [00:05:35] Speaker 04: I'm going to tell you here, I think the rule is a little bit different. [00:05:38] Speaker 04: I don't know what case you're citing, but In Ray Pearl generally stands for the proposition that the mere possession of the property is not significant for automatic state purposes. [00:05:47] Speaker 04: So if you want to go ahead and make your next point, go ahead and do that. [00:05:49] Speaker 01: Well, that's the research I found. [00:05:51] Speaker 04: Okay, I appreciate it. [00:05:53] Speaker 01: Okay, three, the order was entered while my motion to cancel the trustee upon sale was pending and unresolved. [00:05:59] Speaker 01: That motion directly challenged my claim title and the court's decision to proceed without resolving it was premature and prejudicial. [00:06:07] Speaker 01: Point number four, the court waived a 14-day stay on the FRB 4001, allowing immediate eviction and creating irreparable harm and practices, mootness to my appeal. [00:06:19] Speaker 01: The Supreme Court has held that preservation of the status quo is essential to meaningful appellate review. [00:06:25] Speaker 01: And finally, the Backstreet Court denied a motion for state pending appeal without issuing any fines of analysis of fact. [00:06:32] Speaker 01: The court's failure to make a final state of rational for its ruling constitutes a reversible error. [00:06:40] Speaker 01: As I mentioned before, there is an active writ of possession. [00:06:42] Speaker 01: I may be victim any time for a property that respond to not either purchase or have title to. [00:06:49] Speaker 01: Again, my opinions went unheard. [00:06:51] Speaker 01: The record lacks the factual and legal foundation necessary to support relief from state. [00:06:57] Speaker 01: According to this panel, should reverse the order and amend proceedings consistent with law and due process. [00:07:03] Speaker 01: Thank you. [00:07:04] Speaker 04: Okay, thank you. [00:07:04] Speaker 04: Any questions? [00:07:06] Speaker 04: No. [00:07:07] Speaker 04: Okay, you can reserve the rest of the time to respond to Mr. Rothman if you like. [00:07:10] Speaker 04: Okay. [00:07:11] Speaker 04: Okay, okay. [00:07:12] Speaker 04: Thank you so much. [00:07:12] Speaker 04: Okay, yes, go ahead. [00:07:13] Speaker 04: Yeah, relax for a minute. [00:07:16] Speaker 04: Okay, Mr. Rothman, can you hear us? [00:07:21] Speaker 02: Perfectly your honors. [00:07:23] Speaker 02: I can hear anything in the appellant's argument That was in addition to what he had set forth his brief so with that your honor. [00:07:30] Speaker 04: I would not add anything oh Okay Anyone on the panel want to ask Mr.. Rothman a question well, Mr.. Rothman [00:07:42] Speaker 03: He asserts that you didn't have a valid sale. [00:07:45] Speaker 03: Can you explain why you believe the sale resulted in a valid transfer of title to your client? [00:07:54] Speaker 02: because it was a foreclosure sale, and he's basically challenging it that it wasn't invalid money because of what the documents that set forth just showed a copy of a cashier's check and not an actual cashier's check itself. [00:08:16] Speaker 02: And that not only in the remand order, but in a judgment when he sued the Orange Kangaroo in district court, Judge – the chief judge, Dolly G., [00:08:37] Speaker 02: ruled in the final judgment in the district court that his complaint was dismissed without leave to amend, that Orange Kangaroo had titled, I apologize, Your Honor, the anesthesia is still kind of affecting my ability to speak. [00:08:55] Speaker 04: Well, you take your time, okay? [00:08:57] Speaker 04: You've got 15 minutes, take your time. [00:09:00] Speaker 02: And with that, Your Honor, that is the reason that I believe [00:09:05] Speaker 02: And all of that occurred prior to the relief from stay motion. [00:09:11] Speaker 02: These occurred and were brought forth in a request for judicial notice. [00:09:18] Speaker 02: I can't recall if it was in the relief from stay, but Mr. Solano had filed an adversary case also and then also removed the case to judge in the riverside [00:09:33] Speaker 02: Judge Burnell, a district court judge, who claimed that – in his removal to that, claimed that Judge Zuzoro didn't have jurisdiction to even rule in this, which came later. [00:09:45] Speaker 02: And based upon all of the judge's rulings that were subsequent and all of the rulings that occurred in this case and subsequent to this hearing, it seems that without a question that title was passed legally to Orange Kangaroo. [00:10:03] Speaker 02: And with that, Your Honor, I would submit. [00:10:05] Speaker 02: OK, anybody have any further questions? [00:10:08] Speaker 00: The one question that I have, Mr. Rothman, is that the court said that there was relief from stay in this case and a subsequent bankruptcy case. [00:10:18] Speaker 00: What's the basis for granting the relief from the subsequent bankruptcy cases? [00:10:29] Speaker 02: OK, in the subsequent bankruptcy, [00:10:32] Speaker 02: There was a request that – Mr. Solano had filed a request that the relief – there was a subsequent motion by Mr. Solano, and my memory's a little bit not as great as it should be, but I don't believe it's in the record that Judge Azuro granted by himself in order that no additional [00:11:01] Speaker 02: relief would be granted to him, and I guess that would be construed to be that there would be no additional relief from stay. [00:11:11] Speaker 02: Maybe – so there was – I think that would be it, but it may be construed to be two reliefs from stays for the same bankruptcy. [00:11:19] Speaker 02: I know that there was a whole bunch of notices of removals that were removed back. [00:11:25] Speaker 02: I think there was almost, again, this book of record of removals in this case. [00:11:29] Speaker 03: Mr.. Rothman You move for stay relief under D1? [00:11:35] Speaker 02: 362 D1 you didn't move for stay relief under 362 D4 correct Correct and by the way, I'm glad you brought that up your honor I did not ask for in rem because the first time you can't I [00:11:56] Speaker 03: No, I'm not questioning what you that you did anything wrong. [00:11:59] Speaker 03: I'm just I'm just trying to make sure that to the extent that Judge Zurzolo may have granted more relief than you asked for We may want to take a look at that In other words if he granted if he yeah, if he if his order could be construed to have granted in rem relief That's not something you sought [00:12:25] Speaker 02: I did not seek it in rem, and I don't believe you can the first time. [00:12:30] Speaker 04: Right. [00:12:30] Speaker 04: Okay. [00:12:31] Speaker 04: Also, were you, your client was the owner of the property at that point? [00:12:36] Speaker 02: Yes. [00:12:36] Speaker 04: Well, they can't. [00:12:37] Speaker 02: I apologize. [00:12:38] Speaker 04: That's another reason why, right? [00:12:39] Speaker 04: I mean, it's secured lenders get to get, get to ask for D4 relief, so. [00:12:44] Speaker 02: That, that, yeah, after you secured lender. [00:12:46] Speaker 04: Yeah, okay. [00:12:48] Speaker 02: Okay, any other questions? [00:12:50] Speaker 00: None from me. [00:12:50] Speaker 00: Okay. [00:12:51] Speaker 04: All right, thank you so much, Mr. Roppen. [00:12:52] Speaker 04: Hope your, I said improves. [00:12:57] Speaker 02: Thank you your honors. [00:12:59] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:12:59] Speaker 02: Thank you your honor. [00:12:59] Speaker 04: Okay, and we're going to let Mr. Solano come up and have the last word, okay? [00:13:06] Speaker 01: Thank you, your honor. [00:13:07] Speaker 01: Just a commentary on Mr. Rothman's comment regarding the district case. [00:13:13] Speaker 01: By the way, it's case 24-01587, Judge Dolly G. She did grant a ruling without a leave to amend, but [00:13:27] Speaker 01: In her write-up, she had several causes of action that were dismissed with prejudice and others without prejudice. [00:13:34] Speaker 01: Yet she overall denied no leave to amend, granted no leave to amend, which is contradictory. [00:13:39] Speaker 01: That's grounds for appeal also. [00:13:40] Speaker 01: So that case, we did a motion for reconsideration. [00:13:43] Speaker 01: That's still pending. [00:13:46] Speaker 01: I just want to clarify that so the case is still active. [00:13:48] Speaker 01: Okay. [00:13:49] Speaker 01: Is there anything else? [00:13:50] Speaker 01: That's it. [00:13:50] Speaker 01: Thank you. [00:13:50] Speaker 04: All right. [00:13:51] Speaker 04: Then the matter is submitted and thank you for your good arguments for Mr. Rothman and Mr. Solano and we'll do our best to get you a written decision as soon as we can. [00:13:59] Speaker 04: Thank you very much. [00:14:00] Speaker 04: Appreciate it. [00:14:00] Speaker 04: Thank you. [00:14:01] Speaker 04: Okay. [00:14:01] Speaker 04: You're welcome. [00:14:02] Speaker 04: Okay. [00:14:03] Speaker 02: Let's call. [00:14:03] Speaker 04: Thank you, Your Honor. [00:14:04] Speaker 00: You bet. [00:14:04] Speaker 04: Thank you, Mr. Rothman. [00:14:05] Speaker 04: Okay.