Legal Opinion
In Re Andrew Westhem and Emily Westhem, Bankrupts. C. Douglas Wikle v. Andrew Westhem and Emily Westhem
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 23, 1981No. 79-3127PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SNEED, Circuit Judge:
This case raises the question whether under the circumstances of this case a diamond ring having a fair market value of more than $3000 and described as “one emerald cut diamond of approximately four (4) carats in weight with two side diamonds” is exempt property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 24 (now 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)) and Cal.Civ.Proc. Code § 690.1. The bankruptcy judge held it was not, but on appeal from this decision the district court reversed and held that it was. In re Westhem, 459 F.Supp. 556 (C.D.Cal.1978). We affirm the district court.
As the district court pointed…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re Estate of MillingtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Los Angeles Finance Co. v. FloresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- In Re WesthemDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1978
3Cited by14 opinions
- Lebovitz v. Hagemeyer (In Re Lebovitz)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- In Re GoldbergUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1986
- In Re LevaUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · 1989
- In Re MimsUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1985
- In Re MeyerUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.