Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shoen v. Shoen (In re Shoen)

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 6, 1999No. Nos. 97-17369, 98-15455Published

1DissentMcKEOWN, Circuit Judge

Because I find no magic in the nature of the Arizona judgment that removes it from the general rule disallowing postpetition interest on unsecured claims, I respectfully dissent.

I

Nature of the Judgment

The majority takes a straightforward state court judgment for damages and transforms it into “a judicially prescribed sale of stock” that is impervious to the operation of federal bankruptcy law. As the majority acknowledges, this is an effort “to analytically place” the judgment into a category, even one that does not “comfortably fit.” The judgment calls for no such creativity on our part.

This…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Butner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. BonjornoSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  5. BFP v. Resolution Trust CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1994

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API