![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
August 29, 1986, Filed
[*837] JOHN MINOR WISDOM, Circuit Judge:
This appeal presents two questions: first, whether the district court should dismiss the claims against the Canadian defendants in deference to the stay order of a Canadian winding-up court under principles of international comity and, second, whether this Court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal of the district court's order denying dismissal and setting the case for trial. Because we hold that we do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal, we do not answer the first question and, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.
In 1983, Canadian Commercial Bank lent fifteen million dollars to Ted True, Johnnie Sue True, and Ted True, Inc. to develop oil leases in Texas. Canadian Commercial, a Canadian-chartered bank, made [**2] the loan through its licensed agency in California. [*838] In return for the loan, the Trues granted the Canadian Commercial a security interest in their leases. The following year, the Trues became bankrupt. Canadian Commercial later appeared in the bankruptcy proceedings in the Northern District of Texas to assert its security interest in the Trues's leases.
Pan Eastern Exploration and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation also appeared in the True bankruptcy proceeding. They owned natural gas leases in the same fields in which the Trues held oil leases. They alleged that the Trues had illegally converted natural gas from the fields and requested injunctive relief. Treating their request as a motion to lift the automatic stay of bankruptcy, the bankruptcy court entered an order in October of 1985 to allow Pan Eastern and Anadarko to file an action asserting their claims in another court. 1
[**3] Meanwhile, Canadian Commercial also became bankrupt. In September of 1985, a petition was filed in the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta, Canada to liquidate the bank under the Canadian Winding-Up Act. The Canadian court appointed Price Waterhouse, Ltd. 2 as provisional liquidator and issued a stay order enjoining all proceedings against the bank without leave of the court. Concurrently, the Superintendent of Banks of California took action against the bank's California offices and seized its assets there. Price Waterhouse contested this seizure and later reached a settlement with the Superintendent by which the assets of the bank were transferred to Price Waterhouse for liquidation with the proceeds to be returned to the Superintendent after certain expenses and preferred creditors were paid.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
798 F.2d 837 *; 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 36958 **
PAN EASTERN EXPLORATION CO. & ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORP., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. HUFO OILS, ET AL., Defendants, CANADIAN COMMERCIAL BANK, PRICE WATERHOUSE LIMITED & PW LIQUIDATORS, INC., Defendants-Appellants
Prior History: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Lucius D. Bunton, III, District Judge, Presiding.
comity, final judgment, qualified immunity, district court, collateral, denial of a motion, court's decision, stand trial, deference, appeals, leases, merits
Civil Procedure, Appeals, Appellate Jurisdiction, Final Judgment Rule, Collateral Order Doctrine, Governments, Courts, Judicial Comity, Banking Law, Bank Activities, General Overview, State & Territorial Governments, Relations With Governments, International Law, Dispute Resolution, Comity Doctrine, Comity Doctrine Procedures, Discretion Regarding Procedures, Dismissal of Appeals