96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7965, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,217 in Re Pnp Holdings Corp. & Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., Debtors. Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., 99 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7965, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,217 in Re Pnp Holdings Corp. & Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., Debtors. Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., 99 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases · “Liability for improper custom may not be predicated on isolated or sporadic incidents.”
15 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: SPCP Group, LLC v. Svalbard Holdings Limited (delch, 2025-08-15)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) SPCP Group, LLC v. Svalbard Holdings Limited
Del. Ch. · 2025 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
creditor who files a proof of claim consents to the bankruptcy court's personal jurisdiction over the creditor in proceedings to resolve the bankruptcy estate's objections to the claim.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Keys v. 701 Mariposa Project, LLC (In Re 701 Mariposa Project, LLC)
9th Cir. BAP · 2014 · confidence medium
See Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. 323, 334-35 , 86 S.Ct. 467 , 15 L.Ed.2d 391 (1966) (stating that “[b]y presenting their claims respondents subjected themselves to all the consequences that attach to an appearance” and that “a creditor who offers a proof of claim and demands its allowance is bound by what is judicially determined”); Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay’N Pak Stores, Inc. (In re PNP Holdings Corp.), 99 F.3d 910, 911 (9th Cir.1996) (holding that creditor consented to bankruptcy’s personal jurisdiction by filing proof of claim).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re: 701 Mariposa Project, LLC
9th Cir. BAP · 2014 · confidence medium
See Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. 323 , 334-35 18 (1966) (stating that “[b]y presenting their claims respondents 19 subjected themselves to all the consequences that attach to an 20 appearance” and that “a creditor who offers a proof of claim and 21 demands its allowance is bound by what is judicially 22 determined”); Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay’N Pak Stores, Inc. (In 23 re PNP Holdings Corp.), 99 F.3d 910, 911 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding 24 that creditor consented to bankruptcy’s personal jurisdiction by 25 filing proof of claim). 26 But when, as here, the creditor has not filed a proo…
discussed Cited "see" In Re Hensley
Bankr. D. Kan. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc. (In re PNP Holdings Corp.), 184 B.R. 805 (9th Cir. BAP 1995) aff’d 99 F.3d 910 (9th Cir.1996) (holding by filing proof of claim court acquired jurisdiction over a foreign corporation). 28 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Paques, Inc. (In Re Paques, Inc.)
Bankr. E.D. Pa. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re PNP Holdings Corp., 99 F.3d 910 (9th Cir.1996) (“Tucker [a Canadian corporation] consented to the bankruptcy court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction by filing a proof of claim”); In re American Export Group Intern.
cited Cited "see, e.g." In Re Association of Volleyball Professionals
Bankr. C.D. Cal. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay ‘N Pak Stores, Inc. (In re PNP Holdings Corp.), 99 F.3d 910 , 911 (9th Cir.1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7965, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,217 in Re Pnp Holdings Corporation and Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., Debtors. Tucker Plastics, Inc.
v.
Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc.
95-35871.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Oct 31, 1996.
99 F.3d 910
Published
3 passages pin-cited by 3 cases
Pinpoint authority: #41,569 of 633,719
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (1) · C.D. California (1) · Court of Chancery of Delaware (1)

99 F.3d 910

96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7965, 96 Daily Journal
D.A.R. 13,217
In re PNP HOLDINGS CORPORATION and Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc., Debtors.
TUCKER PLASTICS, INC., Appellant,
v.
PAY 'N PAK STORES, INC., Appellee.

No. 95-35871.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Oct. 10, 1996.
Decided Oct. 31, 1996.

Arnold B. Robbins, Breskin & Robbins, Seattle, WA, for defendant-appellant.

John J. Mitchell, Lane Powell Spears Lubersky, Seattle, WA, for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ashland, Hagan and Tchaikovsky, Presiding Judges. BAP No. WW-94-02207-AsHT.

Before BROWNING, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Tucker Plastics, Inc. filed a proof of claim in Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc.'s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding. Later, the trustee in Pay 'N Pak's bankruptcy estate initiated a preference action against Tucker. Tucker, a Canadian corporation, filed a motion for summary judgment, contesting the bankruptcy court's personal jurisdiction. The bankruptcy court denied the motion, holding that under Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. 323, 335, 86 S.Ct. 467, 475-76, 15 L.Ed.2d 391 (1966), a creditor who files a proof of claim consents to the bankruptcy court's personal jurisdiction over the creditor in proceedings to resolve the bankruptcy estate's objections to the claim. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed. See Tucker Plastics, Inc. v. Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc. (In re PNP Holdings Corp. & Pay 'N Pak Stores, Inc.), 184 B.R. 805 (9th Cir. BAP 1995). We affirm the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.

2

Tucker argues that Katchen was undercut by the promulgation of Bankruptcy Rule 7004(e), establishing a procedure for asserting personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant through the service of summons. This provision, Tucker asserts, precludes the court from implying personal jurisdiction from the filing of a claim. However, a person may consent to personal jurisdiction expressly or by implication regardless of the existence of the power to serve process. Insurance Corp. of Ireland, Ltd. v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 703, 102 S.Ct. 2099, 2104-05, 72 L.Ed.2d 492 (1982).

3

The bankruptcy court and the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel correctly held that Tucker consented to the bankruptcy court's exercise of personal jurisdiction by filing a proof of claim.

4

AFFIRMED.