CURTIS V. AMMEC INVESTMENTS, II, ET AL.
- Case Type:
- Consumer
- Case Status:
- Affirmed
- Citation:
- 24-7446 (9th Circuit, Mar 18,2026) Not Published
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court's summary judgment in favor of Ammec Investments II, Inc., voiding several property transfers orchestrated by former attorney Greta Sedeal Curtis and rejecting Curtis's collateral attacks on the state court judgment, which was final and binding, because Curtis controlled the defense for the entities involved.
- Procedural context:
- On appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) for the 9th circuit, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court's summary judgment in favor of Ammec Investments II, Inc. that was affirmed by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP).
- Facts:
- While representing Ammec, Curtis received a 5.774% interest in Los Angeles real property as payment for legal services. The interest was conveyed to Sisters in Law, LLC ("Sisters"), a company Curtis owned and controlled
Sisters transferred the interest to Dr. Roots Herbs, LLC ("Roots"), another Curtis-controlled entity. Curtis also executed a $150,000 deed of trust to Vincent Thames on behalf of Roots and engaged in further transfers between herself and Roots.
A California state court voided the initial deed to Sisters (the "Ammec/Sisters deed") because Curtis violated professional conduct rules by failing to provide a written fee agreement or disclose conflicts of interest.
Years later, Ammec initiated an adversary proceeding to cancel all "downstream transfers" (the deeds to Roots, Curtis, and Thames) under California Civil Code § 3412.
- Judge(s):
- CLIFTON, FRIEDLAND, and BENNETT
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!
