Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8692838
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Marshack v. Pei-Yu Yang
No. 8692838 · Decided July 7, 2014
No. 8692838·Ninth Circuit · 2014·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
July 7, 2014
Citation
No. 8692838
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Pei-Yu Yang appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in an adversary proceeding brought by the bankruptcy trustee Richard Alan Marshack alleging that debtor Yan Sui fraudulently transferred his interest in real property to Yang. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review de novo, Conlon v. United States, 474 F.3d 616, 621 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary adjudication on the trustee’s fraudulent transfer claims under California Civil Code §§ 3439.04 and 3439.05 because Yang admitted that Sui transferred his interest in the real property to her without receiving anything in exchange for the transfer and did so with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors, and because Yang did not bring a motion to withdraw her admissions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36(b). See Fed.R.Civ.P. 36(b) (“A matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended.”); Conlon, 474 F.3d at 621 (“Unanswered requests for admissions may be relied on as the basis for granting summary judgment.”); see also Fed. R. Bankr.P. 7036 (applying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36 in bankruptcy adversary proceedings). Yang’s contentions that the requests for admissions were defective and invalid, that the trustee’s complaint was invalid and untimely, and that the bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction over the adversary proceeding are unpersuasive. We deny all pending motions and requests, including Sui’s motion to intervene, filed on February 18, 2014. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Pei-Yu Yang appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in an adversary proceeding brought by the bankruptcy trustee Richard Alan Marshack alleging that debtor Yan Sui fraudulently transferred his interest in real proper
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Pei-Yu Yang appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in an adversary proceeding brought by the bankruptcy trustee Richard Alan Marshack alleging that debtor Yan Sui fraudulently transferred his interest in real proper
02United States, 474 F.3d 616, 621 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.
03The district court properly granted summary adjudication on the trustee’s fraudulent transfer claims under California Civil Code §§ 3439.04 and 3439.05 because Yang admitted that Sui transferred his interest in the real property to her with
0436(b) (“A matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended.”); Conlon, 474 F.3d at 621 (“Unanswered requests for admissions may be relied on as the bas
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Pei-Yu Yang appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in an adversary proceeding brought by the bankruptcy trustee Richard Alan Marshack alleging that debtor Yan Sui fraudulently transferred his interest in real proper
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Marshack v. Pei-Yu Yang in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on July 7, 2014.
Use the citation No. 8692838 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.