Ozenne v. Chase Manhattan Bank, No. 11-60039 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDebtor appealed the bankruptcy appellate panel's (BAP) denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus. The court overruled In re Salter and held that the BAP is not a court established by Act of Congress under subsection (a) of the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(a), so it does not have jurisdiction to entertain a mandamus petition. Accordingly, the court vacated the decision of the BAP and remanded with instructions to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Court Description: Bankruptcy. Vacating the bankruptcy appellate panel’s (BAP) denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus, the court of appeals held that the BAP did not have jurisdiction to consider the mandamus petition. The court held that the BAP lacked jurisdiction under the All Writs Act because the BAP, which is established by the circuit judicial council pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(b)(1), is not one of the “courts established by Act of Congress.” Concurring in the judgment only, and dissenting otherwise, Judge Bybee wrote that the All Writs Act does not require that a court be established directly by Congress. He wrote that the majority’s opinion raises constitutional problems because he doubts that Congress can delegate its powers to create courts to the judicial branch. IN RE OZENNE 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.