Summary
holding that “plaintiff has satisfied the first prong of the test as he has engaged in a protected activity” by the filing of a PREA complaint
Summary of this case from Burrell v. DurkinOpinion
No. 21640.
February 6, 1968.
Brent Sellick, in pro. per.
James J. Biggins, Jr. (argued) of Smith, Biggins Crockett, San Diego, Cal., for appellee.
Before BARNES, JERTBERG and ELY, Circuit Judges.
Appellant appeals from an order of the District Court affirming the order of the referee in bankruptcy declaring null and void a judgment lien on real property belonging to bankrupts.
The lien arose out of a money judgment obtained by appellant against the bankrupts in a state court action on a conditional sales contract for the unpaid balance of the purchase price of a seagoing vessel sold by appellant to bankrupts. The action was in personam and not in rem against the vessel.
Appellant contends that the lien voided by the order of the referee is a maritime lien which the bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to pass upon. Appellant's contention is without merit. See Foust v. Munson Steamship Lines, 299 U.S. 77, 57 S.Ct. 90, 81 L.Ed. 49 (1936), and Sellick v. Sun Harbor Marina, Inc., 9 Cir., 384 F.2d 870, decided October 27, 1967.
Affirmed.