Case ID: br_572/html/0553-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE: TJ PLAZA, LLC, Debtor, TJ Plaza, LLC; DSWC, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. Bank NA, as Trustee on behalf of the Registered Holders of Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-C6, Defendant-Appellee. In re: TJ Plaza, LLC, Debtor, TJ Plaza, LLC; DSWC, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. Bank NA, as Trustee on behalf of the Registered Holders of Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-C6, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 15-16968, No. 15-16969
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 18, 2017  San Francisco, California
    Filed April 24, 2017
    Zachariah Larson, Esquire, Matthew C. Zirzow, Esquire, Larson & Zirzow, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiffs-Appellants
    Blakeley E. Griffith, Esquire, Attorney, Kelly Harrison Dove, Esquire, Attorney, Charles E. Gianelloni, Attorney, Robert Richard Kinas, Esquire, Attorney, Snell & Wilmer, LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and FERNANDEZ and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

We dismiss these consolidated appeals because the appellants were the prevailing parties in the district court, and there is nothing in the judgment that can be reformed on appeal. “A party may not appeal from a judgment or decree in his favor, for the purpose of obtaining a review of findings he deems erroneous which are not necessary to support the decree.” United States v. Good Samaritan Church, 29 F.3d 487, 488 (9th Cir. 1994) (quoting Elec. Fittings Corp. v. Thomas & Betts Co., 307 U.S. 241, 242, 59 S.Ct. 860, 83 L.Ed. 1263 (1939)). There is no exception to the general rule here because “[djeterminations which are immaterial to the judgment below have no preclusive effect on subsequent litigation, especially if they cannot be appealed” and because, “[t]o the extent that the district court order was not favorable to appellants, it does not bind them in subsequent litigation.” Id. at 489.

These consolidated appeals are DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.