HENDRIK DORSSERS V. JAMES RIGBY, JR., No. 13-35351 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AUG 08 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS HENDRIK J. DORSSERS; CONCEPT DORSSERS, No. 13-35351 D.C. No. 2:11 cv-2077- BJR Appellants, MEMORANDUM* v. JAMES F. RIGBY, JR., Trustee, solely in his capacity as Chapter 7 trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Michael R. Mastro, Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, Senior District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted July 8, 2014 Seattle, Washington Before: ALARCÃ N, TASHIMA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Hendrik Dorssers and Concept Dorssers (together, Dorssers ) appeal the district court s decision affirming the judgment of the bankruptcy court. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1), and we have jurisdiction * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1). We review the bankruptcy court s findings of fact for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo, Alexander v. Compton (In re Bonham), 229 F.3d 750, 763 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm. 1. The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding that the February Note and Medina Deed of Trust were never consummated. See Willener v. Sweeting, 730 P.2d 45, 49 (Wash. 1986). Likewise, the bankruptcy court did not clearly err in discrediting Dorssers self-serving testimony that Dorssers held the February Note, see Retz v. Samson (In re Retz), 606 F.3d 1189, 1196 (9th Cir. 2010); in finding that Thomas Hazelrigg, III, was not Dorssers agent, see Nordstrom Credit, Inc. v. Dep t of Revenue, 845 P.2d 1331, 1335 (Wash. 1993); or in finding that the payments Dorssers received related to the November Note, not the February Note, see Willener, 730 P.2d at 49. In each instance, the bankruptcy court s findings were supported by Dorssers own testimony. The bankruptcy court also did not err in concluding that the February Note and Medina Deed of Trust were invalid sham transactions and avoidable fraudulent transfers. 2. The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding that Dorssers failed to establish a good faith defense under 11 U.S.C. § 548(c). See Figter Ltd. v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass n of Am. (In re Figter Ltd.), 118 F.3d 635, 638 (9th Cir. 1997). The bankruptcy court provided a lengthy list of objective, well-2- supported reasons for finding that Dorssers lacked good faith. Dorssers contrary arguments, which concern his subjective good faith in Michael Mastro, do not undermine the bankruptcy court s finding. See Hayes v. Palm Seedlings PartnersA (In re Agric. Research & Tech. Grp., Inc.), 916 F.2d 528, 536 (9th Cir. 1990). AFFIRMED. -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.
