Walton v. County of Lake CA1/1
A144384
| Cal. Ct. App. | Aug 24, 2016Background
- Michael Walton owned properties subject to Lake County tax liens and repeatedly challenged county tax-lien sales and related proceedings in state and federal courts.
- Walton previously lost a mandamus action contesting the County’s resolutions authorizing sale of tax-defaulted properties; that judgment was final.
- Walton filed bankruptcy; the County sought and obtained relief from the automatic bankruptcy stay (bankruptcy court memorandum and order dated August 27, 2009).
- Walton sued the County and individual supervisors in state court alleging fraud, negligence, and emotional distress, claiming the County sold his properties in violation of the automatic stay and that courts were corrupt.
- Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings, asserting collateral estoppel from the prior mandamus judgment and that enforcement/relief for alleged stay violations lies exclusively in the bankruptcy court.
- The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings on collateral estoppel and jurisdictional grounds; Walton appealed, renewing claims that sales occurred before the bankruptcy order and asserting judicial bias.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Walton may pursue state-law claims for alleged violation of the bankruptcy automatic stay | Walton: sales occurred Aug 21, 2009 (before Aug 27 order lifting stay); seeks consequences for stay violation, not relitigation of stay order | County: bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the automatic stay; state courts cannot adjudicate stay violations | Held: State-law claims premised on alleged stay violation are barred because the bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the stay |
| Whether Walton may relitigate validity of tax liens and county procedures for sale | Walton: challenges sales, not liens; produced evidence showing liens invalid | County: prior mandamus judgment resolved the underlying lien validity and sale-authorizing actions; collateral estoppel bars relitigation | Held: Claims attacking the liens or predicate actions for sale are barred by collateral estoppel from the prior mandamus judgment |
| Whether denial of Walton’s motion to shorten time to file late opposition was erroneous | Walton: sought to file late opposition and shorten time | County: Walton’s opposition was untimely and court properly refused to consider it | Held: Walton waived meaningful challenge; denial of shortening time was not preserved as a viable appellate issue |
| Whether trial judge should have been disqualified for bias | Walton: alleged systemic corruption and individual judge bias based on adverse rulings and other accusations | County: no factual basis for disqualification; rulings against a party insufficient to show bias | Held: Disqualification denied—adverse rulings do not establish bias; issue waived for lack of cogent argument on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Hicks v. E.T. Legg & Associates, 89 Cal.App.4th 496 (Cal. Ct. App.) (bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction over alleged stay violations)
- Abdullah v. United States Savings Bank, 43 Cal.App.4th 1101 (Cal. Ct. App.) (existence of federal stay remedy displaces state-law remedies for alleged stay violations)
- Kemper v. County of San Diego, 242 Cal.App.4th 1075 (Cal. Ct. App.) (collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of issues actually litigated and necessarily decided)
- DKN Holdings LLC v. Faerber, 61 Cal.4th 813 (Cal.) (elements and application of issue preclusion)