Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Johnson

I concur except that I dissent on the second issue regarding Johnsons’ state law counterclaim. The majority refuses to consider Johnsons’ counterclaim because of a claimed inconsistency between it and John-sons’ position in the bankruptcy proceedings. However, the majority misconstrues the counterclaim. In fact, no inconsistency exists and Johnsons should be allowed to assert their counterclaim.

Johnsons are not claiming they were forced to convert from a Chapter 13 to a Chapter 7 filing; rather they are claiming they relied upon representations of FLBO and were injured when FLBO reneged on…