In re: DAVINDER KAUR v. Davinder Kaur

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: DAVINDER KAUR,
Debtor,
SAHERINDER KAUR,
Appellant,
v.
DAVINDER KAUR,
Appellee.
No. 11-60052
BAP No. 10-1398
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Hollowell, Pappas, and Jury, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
Submitted July 24, 2013**
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Saherinder Kaur appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s
FILED
AUG 05 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

11-60052 2
(“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment determining that
chapter 7 debtor Davinder Kaur’s obligation to Saherinder Kaur was dischargeable.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo BAP
decisions, and apply the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the
bankruptcy court’s ruling. Anastas v. Am. Sav. Bank (In re Anastas), 94 F.3d 1280,
1283 (9th Cir. 1996). We review for clear error findings of fact, including a
finding whether a requisite element of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) is present. Id. We
affirm.
The bankruptcy court did not clearly err in finding that Davinder Kaur did
not engage in misrepresentation or fraud, and therefore properly concluded that the
obligation arising from a state court judgment was dischargeable. See 11 U.S.C.
§ 523(a)(2)(A) (excepting from discharge debt obtained by false pretenses, false
representations, or actual fraud); id. § 523(a)(4) (excepting from discharge debt
caused by the debtor’s fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity);
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, N.C., 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985) (“[W]hen a trial
judge’s finding is based on his decision to credit the testimony of one of two or
more witnesses, each of whom has told a coherent and facially plausible story that
is not contradicted by extrinsic evidence, that finding, if not internally inconsistent,

-- 2 of 3 --

11-60052 3
can virtually never be clear error.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --