CATHOLIC BISHOP OF N. ALASKA V. UNAATUQ, LLC, No. 15-35197 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on August 17, 2016.
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 26 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re: CATHOLIC BISHOP OF NORTHERN ALASKA, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 15-35197 Debtor, ______________________________ D.C. No. 4:14-cv-00010-HRH District of Alaska, Fairbanks DEWEY GREEN; MARY READER, ORDER AMENDING Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNAATUQ, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. In re: CATHOLIC BISHOP OF NORTHERN ALASKA, No. 15-35205 D.C. No. 4:14-cv-00012-HRH Debtor, ______________________________ LOUIE GREEN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNAATUQ, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. Before: FISHER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. The memorandum disposition filed on August 17, 2016 is amended on page three line six by adding new footnote one, which states: Claimants’ argument that the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction over them fails. Claimants filed a Rule 60(b)(4) motion in the bankruptcy court seeking relief from the prior sale order, arguing that they had acquired title to a portion of the Property through adverse possession. See Wellness Int’l Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, 135 S. Ct. 1932, 1939 (2015) (stating there is no jurisdictional defect “when the parties knowingly and voluntarily consent to adjudication by a bankruptcy judge”). With this amendment, the petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing shall be filed. 2
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.
