Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Juan O. Plata, in Re Catalina Plata, Debtors. Peter H. Arkison, Trustee v. Juan O. Plata, Catalina Plata

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 10, 1992No. 90-35498Published

1DissentBrunetti, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent.

The majority misapplies In re Nash, 765 F.2d 1410 (9th Cir.1985). Nash involved a dismissal of a Chapter 13 case, not a conversion of a Chapter 13 case to a Chapter 7 case. Although the majority can find “no clear reason” for distinguishing between dismissals and conversions, one is given by Nash itself — the Bankruptcy Code. Nash relied primarily on section 349(b)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code which provides that dismissal of a case “revests the property of the estate in the entity in which such property was vested immediately before the commencement of the case.” 11…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Carlos Resendez, Jr., and Marlene Resendez v. Dwight Lindquist, William Westphal and J. J. MickelsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
  2. In Re RedickUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 1987
  3. In Re De VosDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1987
  4. Ledford v. Burns (In Re Burns)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988
  5. In Re GiambittiUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · 1983

3 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