Noah Hillen v. Triple B, LLC

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEC 17 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
In re: SHILOH MANAGEMENT No. 19-35266
SERVICES, INC.,
D.C. Nos. 1:18-cv-00316-EJL
Debtor, 1:18-cv-00317-EJL
______________________________ 1:18-cv-00318-EJL
NOAH G. HILLEN, solely in his capacity
as Chapter 7 Trustee, MEMORANDUM*
Appellant,
v.
TRIPLE B, LLC; et al.,
Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 10, 2019
Seattle, Washington
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Before: McKEOWN and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges, and HARPOOL,** District
Judge.
Bankruptcy Trustee Noah Hillen appeals the district court’s judgment
affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting the defendants’ motions for
summary judgment. Hillen seeks to avoid certain liens arising from three different
deeds of trust on the basis that the deeds were deemed unrecorded pursuant to
Idaho law, see Idaho Code § 55-805, because the notary acknowledgments on each
deed were defective. Credit Bureau of Preston v. Sleight, 440 P.2d 143, 148
(Idaho 1968). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1) and we
affirm.1
We are bound by our precedent in In re Big River Grain, Inc., 718 F.2d 968
(9th Cir. 1983), absent intervening controlling authority, see FDIC v. McSweeney,
976 F.2d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 1992), or a subsequent indication from Idaho courts
that our interpretation of Idaho law was incorrect, Owen v. United States, 713 F.2d
1461, 1464 (9th Cir. 1983). The parties agree that the acknowledgment in Big
River Grain was identical to the acknowledgments in this case in all material
respects. In Big River Grain, our court held that the acknowledgment substantially
**
The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for
the Western District of Missouri, sitting by designation.
1
Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we recite only those
necessary to resolve the issues on appeal.
2
complied with Idaho law when read in conjunction with the deed. 718 F.2d at 970.
Idaho law has remained consistent since Jordan v. Securities Credit Corp., 314
P.2d 967 (Idaho 1957), and we agree with the parties that subsequent Idaho cases
reiterated, and did not change, Jordan’s rule. As such, Big River Grain remains
controlling.
Although the amendments are not controlling, we note that Idaho amended
its statutes in 2017 and significantly relaxed the rigid formal requirements for
certificates of acknowledgment. See generally Idaho Code §§ 51-115, 51-116; see
also §§ 55-710, 55-711 (repealed July 1, 2017). The revised statute added a
provision preserving the validity of notarial acts, even when the notary fails to
meet a statutory requirement. See Idaho Code § 51-126. This follows the
“national trend toward a liberal rather than technical interpretation of notary
acknowledgments” that we observed in Big River Grain. 718 F.2d at 971.
AFFIRMED.
3