Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

Sofris v. Maple-Whitworth, Inc.

Sofris v. Maple-Whitworth, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided March 11, 2009 · Noonan, Silverman, Conlon
559 F.3d 917; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 5551; 2009 WL 606243 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

Michael N. Sofris, Michael N. Sofris APC, Beverly Hills, CA, for the appellant Michael N. Sofris, aka Sofris APC., Jerry Kaplan; David Scott Kadin, Kap-lan, Kenegos & Kadin, Beverly Hills, CA, for the appellee Maple-Whitworth, Inc.

Sofris v. Maple-Whitworth, Inc.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

CONLON, District Judge:

This court’s February 10, 2009 opinion recounts that Sofris, joined by others in the Mayman-Nathan faction, filed an involuntary Chapter 7 petition against Maple-Whitworth under 11 U.S.C. § 303(a)-(b). Michael N. Sofris, APC v. Maple-Whitworth, Inc. (In re Maple-Whitworth, Inc.), 556 F.3d 742, 744 (9th Cir. 2009). This statement adopts the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s characterization of the involuntary petition as a Chapter 7 petition. Michael N. Sofris, APC v. Maple-Whitworth, Inc. (In re Maple-Whitworth, Inc.), 375 B.R. 558, 563 (9th Cir. BAP 2007). Sofris filed a notice of errata stating that the involuntary petition was a Chapter 11 petition. No objection to the notice of errata has been filed. The record confirms that the involuntary petition sought relief under Chapter 11. The February 10, 2009 opinion is corrected to reflect that the involuntary petition invoked Chapter 11, not Chapter 7.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.