In Re Doug Mckinney; Nayantara Mckinney, Debtor.gigi Doyle Baldwin, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Doug Mckinney; Nayantara Mckinney, Defendants-appellants, 83 F.3d 427 (9th Cir. 1996)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 83 F.3d 427 (9th Cir. 1996)

Submitted April 10, 1996. *Decided April 12, 1996


Before: HALL, THOMPSON, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Bankruptcy debtor Doug McKinney appeals pro se a decision of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel ("BAP") affirming a judgment by the bankruptcy court in favor of Gigi Doyle Baldwin, after a bench trial, in McKinney's action seeking to establish the non-dischargeability of a debt. The debt arose out McKinney's contract to do a remodeling job on Baldwin's home. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We have reviewed the record and affirm for the reasons set forth in the BAP's December 1, 1994 opinion.1 

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, the request for oral argument is denied

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

We reject McKinney's contention that the BAP improperly decided his case without allowing him the opportunity for oral argument. See Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8012; Toquero v. INS, 956 F.2d 193, 196 n. 4 (9th Cir. 1992) (" [I]t is well settled that oral argument is not necessary to satisfy due process.")