In Re Philip Rubin, Debtor. Philip Rubin v. Hugh E. West Yasue West

Good Law
875 F.2d 755·1989 WL 51357·19 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 987·1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 7055
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 198988-6217California2,383 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sneed, J.

Debtor Philip Rubin appeals from the determination, by a bankruptcy court and bankruptcy appellate panel (BAP), that Hugh and Yasue West’s $125,000 judgment against him is not dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(2)(A) (Supp. V 1987). Although the Wests obtained the judgment by settling an action for fraud against Rubin, Rubin now denies that he acted fraudulently. We affirm.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

This is a story of Debtor Rubin’s abuse of the Wests that we hold amounted to fraudulent conduct. It began in 1969 when the Wests purchased a house in San Diego with a Veterans Administration (VA) loan. By the start of 1976, the house had an appraised value of $38,000, but was encumbered by two deeds of trust. The deeds of trust secured $19,000 remaining on the Wests’ original loan and $5,900 remaining on a second loan. This left the Wests with about $13,000 in equity. Although Mr. West at the time was earning $924 per month at the National Steel Company and was receiving $474 per month in military retirement pay, the Wests had defaulted on the debt secured by the second deed of trust. As a consequence, they faced the possibility of losing the house in a foreclosure…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.