- BAP No. NV-11-1305-PaJuH; Bk. No. 11-15010
- The majority opinion ruled that by using the "context-specific" analysis based on the Nevada Statutes the involuntary bankruptcy case is viewed in the same context as a creditor seeking a charging order pursuant to Nevada Statute. The majority further held that Blixseth’s interests in the Nevada entities were created and exist under Nevada Statute; therefore, his creditor’s remedies are limited by, Nevada state law, that is sufficient reason to deem Blixseth’s interests to be located in Nevada. Dissent by Judge Hollowell agreed that a "context-specific" analysis is required; however, the majority's opinion is based on what may happen if an order for relief in actually happened, and agreed with the bankruptcy court's analysis.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal to BAP from United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada. BAP reverses the Order of the bankruptcy court dismissing the involuntary case for improper venue.
- Montana Department of Revenue ("MDOR"); Idaho State Tax Commission; and the California Franchise Tax Board filed an involuntary Chapter 7 Petition against Blixseth. A few days after the petition was filed Idaho State Tax Commission and the California Franchise Tax Board withdrew based on settling their claims with Blixseth. Petition listed Blixseth’s residence & mailing address as Medina, Washington, and Blixseth’s “county of residence or principal place of business” as Las Vegas, Nevada. MDOR's only evidence that Nevada was the proper venue was based on Blixseth's transfer of most of his assets out of his personal name and into two entities he owned that were Nevada corporate entities. Blixseth had resided in the State of Washington since 2007 and asserted that he conducted no business in Nevada, had no place of business, and no property in Nevada. Both the MDOR and Blixseth agree that assigning a location to Blixseth's ownership interest in the Nevada entities is a context-specific analysis.
- Pappas, Jury, and Hollowell
Jared C. Walters, Trustee v. Jeanne A. Gallegos, et al.
Summarizing by David Treacy
3586 in the system
10 Being Processed