Case ID: br_333/html/0659-01.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: Laurence A. NEUTON, Debtor, Laurence A. Neuton, Appellant, v. City National Bank, as Trustee of the Fannie Borun Trust; et al., Appellees.
    No. 03-56266.
    D.C. No. CV-01-05163-WMB.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 11, 2005.
    
    Decided July 27, 2005.
    Laurence A. Neuton, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellant and Debtor.
    Peter Bronson, Esq., Kelly Lytton & Van LLP, Herbert Katz, Esq., Law Offices of Herbert Katz, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, William Matthew Byrne, Jr., District Judge, Presiding.
    Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Laurence A. Neuton appeals pro se the district court’s orders affirming a bankruptcy court’s orders relating to his Chapter 13 case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo the district court’s decisions on appeal from a bankruptcy court; we review the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. Fowler (In re Fowler), 394 F.3d 1208, 1212 (9th Cir.2005). We review for abuse of discretion the bankruptcy court’s decision to dismiss. Leavitt v. Soto (In re Leavitt), 171 F.3d 1219, 1223 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Neuton’s Chapter 13 case where the five-year term of Neu-ton’s proposed plan of reorganization expired without confirmation. See 11 U.S.C § 1322(d) (a plan may not provide for payments over a period longer than five years); 11 U.S.C. § 1307(c) (a Chapter 13 petition may be dismissed for cause). The bankruptcy court also properly dismissed Neuton’s complaint seeking division of a trust.

We are not persuaded by Neuton’s remaining contentions on appeal.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.