Frankfurth v. Cummins (In Re Cummins)
United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Before VOLINN, GEORGE and HUGHES, Bankruptcy Judges.
The Cummins, appellees herein, filed a timely motion for rehearing. They urge this court to reconsider its decision, 15 B.R. 893, and assert that the panel assumed disputed facts as admitted and relied upon matters outside the record. We deny the motion.
I
Shortly after the outset of trial, the trial court concluded that the case should be disposed of on a legal issue and entered judgment in favor of the debtor, Cummins. The trial court reached this decision by holding, as a matter of law, that a realtor was a professional person under §…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Landry v. Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- Bryant v. CarlesonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Johnson v. New York State Education DepartmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Samuel v. University of PittsburghCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
- Frankfurth v. Cummins (In Re Cummins)United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In Re RobertsUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · 1985
- In Re Casco Bay Lines, Inc.Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the First Circuit · 1982
- Hadley v. Victory Construction Co. (In Re Victory Construction Co.)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Alexander v. Jensen-Carter (In Re Alexander)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 1999
- Omoto v. Ruggera (In Re Omoto)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.