T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T DO NA L D B R AD F OR D S T AR K, A p p e lla n t, v. BARB ARA STARK; EL I ZABE TH STA RK ; SU SA N TSA PA N O S, A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 17201 D . C . N o . 1 : 0 7 - c v - 0 1 3 6 6 - O WW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia O l i ve rW . W a nge r , S e ni orD i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 15, 2011 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: N O O N A N , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an d T R O T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. D ona l d B r a df

or d S t a rk appe a l s f

r om the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s de c i s i on a f f i rm i ng th e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to B a rb a r aS ta rk , E liz ab e th P age S t ark, and S usan T sapano s ( the “ C re di t ors” ). T he bank rupt cycourtgrant ed 

# FI LED FEB 22 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

sum m ary j ud gm entt o the C re di t ors i n thi s a dv er sa ryproceedi ng , fi nd i ng that S t a rk’ s de btt o the C r e di t or s of $2, 065, 504 - - a s e vi de nc e d by ade f aul tj udgm e nt of a C al i forni a probat e c ou rt-- i s non di sc hargeabl e und er11 U . S . C . § 5 23 (a )( 4) as ade bti nc urr e d by f

r aud orde f

a l c a t i on by af

i duc i a ry . W e r e vi e w de novo the b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t’s le g a l c o n c lu s io n s . H ig g in s v . V o r te x F is h in g S y s te m s , I n c ., 37 9 F . 3d 70 1, 70 5 (9th C i r. 20 04 ). W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 28 U . S . C . § 1 58 (d), a nd w e r e ve r s e a nd r e m a nd t o the ba nkrupt c y c our tf orf ur the rpr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e ntw i th thi s de c i s i on. W e dec l i ne the C re di t ors’ i nv i t at i on t o app l y the R oo ker- F el dm an do ctri ne, w hi ch general l y prohi bi t s f eder al court s f

rom re vi ew i ng st at e c ou rtj ud gm ent s. S ee R ooke rv. F i de l i ty T rus tC o. , 263 U . S . 413 ( 1923) ; D i s tr i c tof C ol um bi aC our tof A p p e a ls v . F e ld m a n , 4 6 0 U .S . 4 6 2 ( 1 9 8 3 ) . R o o k e r - F e ld m a n ’s ap p lic a tio n in bank rupt cy“ i s l i m i t ed by the se para t e j uri sdi ct i on al st atut es thatgo vern feder al bank rupt cyl aw , ” a nd the do ctri ne thu s “ has l i tt l e or no app l i ca t i on t o b ankrup t cy pr oc e e di ngs tha ti nvoke s ubs t a nt i ve r i ght s unde rthe B a nkrupt c y C ode ortha t , by the i rna tur e , c oul d a r i s e onl y i n the c ont e xtof af e de r a l ba nkrupt c y c a s e . ” S a s s on v . S o k o lo f

f ( I n r e S a s s o n ) , 4 2 4 F .3 d 8 6 4 , 8 7 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . B a n k ru p tc y c o u r ts have the po w ert o “ avoi d st at e j ud gm ent s i n core bankrup t cyproceedi ng s, m ay3

m odi f y j udgm e nt s , a nd, of

pr i m a ry i m por t a nc e i n thi s c ont e xt , m a y di s c ha r ge th e m .” I d . ( in te rn a l c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d b y g iv in g p r e c lu s iv e e f f e c t to th e p r o b a te ju d g m e n t. B e c aus e the de f

aul tj udgm e nta w a r de d the C r e di t or s m or e tha n the a m ount r e que s t e d i n the c om pl a i nt- - w hi c h di d nots pe c i f y a ny a m ountof

da m a ge s - - the j udgm e nti s voi d unde rs e c t i on 580 of the C a l i f

orni aC ode of

C i vi l P r oc e dur e . T he bank rupt cycourtw as re qu i re d t o app l y C al i forni a’ s c ol l at er al es t op pel pri nci pl es t o the j udgm e nt , s e e C a l - M i c r o, I nc . v. C a ntr e l l ( I n r e C a ntr e l l ) , 329 F . 3d 1119, 1 1 2 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) , a n d aju d g m e n t th a t v io la te s s e c tio n 5 8 0 “is s u b je c t to col l at er al att ac k atany t i m e” as a j ud gm ent“ re nd er ed w hen the court. . . exce eded i t s j ur i s di c t i on i n gr a nt i ng r e l i e f w hi c h the c our tha d no pow e rt o gr a nt , ” R oc hi n v. P a tJ ohns on M a nuf

. C o. , 67 C a l . A pp. 4th 1228, 1239 ( C t . A pp. 1998) . T he prob at e j ud gm enti s there fore vo i d, and a C al i forni a c ou rtw ou l d n othave aff orded it p r e c lu s iv e e f

f e c t. S e e F e rr a r o v . C a m a r lin g h i, 1 6 1 C a l. A p p . 4 th 5 0 9 , 5 3 9 ( C t. A p p . 2 0 0 8 ) (“ [W ] h ere reli ef i s g i v en b eyo n d th e sco p e o f th atask ed fo r, i ti s a nul l i ty , a nd m a y be a tt a c ke d c ol l a t e r a l l y , ori t s e f f e c ta voi de d unde rthe doc tr i ne th a t it is n o t r e s ju d ic a ta .” ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) ) . C a l i f orni ac our t s us e one of

tw o opt i ons w he n f

a c e d w i th ade f

aul tj udgm e nt r e nde r e d i n vi ol a t i on of s e c t i on 580. F i r s t , aC a l i f orni ac our tr e vi e w i ng s uc h a4

j udgm e ntm a y m odi f

y the j udgm e nta nd r e duc e the a w a r d t o the a m ountof da m a ge s s pe c i f

i c a l l y pl e a de d i n the c om pl a i nt , r a the rtha n va c a t i ng the j udgm e nt e nt i r e l y . E l e c . F unds S ol ut i ons v. M urphy , 134 C a l . A pp. 4th 1161, 1177 ( C t . A pp. 2005) . S e c ond, aC a l i f

orni ac our tm a y a l l ow the pl a i nt i f f t o c hoos e t o a m e nd the c om pl a i ntt o a s s e r tgr e a t e rda m a ge s . G r e e nup v. R odm a n, 42 C a l . 3d 822, 830 ( 1986) . I f

the pl a i nt i f

f doe s s o, a l l i s s ue s a r e ope n f orr e - a dj udi c a t i on, i nc l udi ng l i abi l i ty . I d. a t830. H ere, th e co m p l ai n td i d n o tsp eci fy th e am o u n to f d am ag es so u g h tag ai n st S t a rk, a nd w e de c l i ne t o r e duc e tha ta m ountt o z e r o. T he r e f or e , w e r e ve r s e the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s gr a ntof

s um m a ry j udgm e nta nd r e m a nd w i th i ns truc t i ons t o a l l ow th e C r e d ito r s to f

ile a n a m e n d e d c o m p la in t. T h e b a n k ru p tc y c o u r t s h o u ld th e n h o ld an ev i d en t i ary h eari n g t o d et erm i n e w h eth er S t ark o w es a d eb tt o th e C red i t o rs, h o w m u c h th a t d e b t is , a n d w h e th e rth e d e b t is n o n d is c h a r g e ab le . R E V E R S E D a n d R E M A N D E D .