In Re Ardas Yanik, Debtor.julian Ayrs, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Ardas Yanik; David Horowitz, Hon.; Lawrence A. Diamant,defendants-appellees, 8 F.3d 34 (9th Cir. 1993)
Annotate this CaseBefore: FLETCHER, POOLE, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Judgment creditor Julian Ayrs appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's ("BAP") order dismissing his appeal of the bankruptcy court's order quashing a subpoena Ayrs served on California Superior Court Judge David Horowitz. The BAP dismissed the appeal on the ground that the bankruptcy court's order was a nonappealable interlocutory order. We lack jurisdiction over Ayrs's appeal.
"Interlocutory orders [of the bankruptcy court] are not appealable as of right" and are "not appealable to the court of appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)." Pizza of Hawaii, Inc. v. Shakey's Inc. (In re Pizza of Hawaii, Inc.), 761 F.2d 1374, 1378 (9th Cir. 1985). Here, the bankruptcy court's order granting the motion to quash the subpoena Ayrs served on Judge Horowitz is interlocutory. See United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 690-69 (1974). Thus, it is not appealable to this court. See In re Pizza of Hawaii, Inc., 761 F.2d at 1378. Accordingly, we dismiss Ayrs's appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, we deny appellant's request for oral argument
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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
