Opinion ID: 3039499
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: We independently review the bankruptcy court’s rulings on appeal from the BAP. See Salazar v. McDonald (In re Salazar), 430 F.3d 992, 994 (9th Cir. 2005); Miller v. Cardinale (In re DeVille), 361 F.3d 539, 547 (9th Cir. 2004). “Because we are in as good a position as the BAP to review bankruptcy court rulings, we independently examine the bankruptcy court’s decision, reviewing the bankruptcy court’s interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code de novo and its factual findings for clear error.” United States v. Hatton (In re Hatton), 220 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000); see also Am. Law Ctr. PC v. Stanley (In re Jastrem), 253 F.3d 438, 441 (9th Cir. 2001). We will not disturb a bankruptcy court’s award of attorney’s fees “absent an abuse of discretion or an erroneous application of the law.” In re Nucorp Energy, Inc., 764 F.2d 655, 657 (9th Cir. 1985); see also Dawson v. Wash. Mutual Bank (In re Dawson), 390 F.3d 1139, 1145 (9th Cir. 2004). That is, we will not reverse an award of fees unless we have a definite and firm conviction that the bankruptcy court committed clear error in the conclusion it reached after weighing all of the relevant factors.