United States v. Stella Menatos

Bad Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 1515·925 F.2d 333·1991 WL 10909·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 1500·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 947
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 5, 199189-55612California835 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leavy, J.

Stella Menatos appeals from the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States in its action to collect defaulted National Direct Student Loans (“NDSLs”). Menatos contends the action is time-barred under federal law. In the alternative, Menatos claims the action is barred by the doctrine of laches. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Between February 1, 1966, and October 4,1973, Menatos, a student at the University of California at Los Angeles (“UCLA”), executed and delivered fourteen promissory notes to UCLA for loans totalling $7,403.00 under the National Defense and National Direct Student Loan programs, now known as the Perkins Loan Program, authorized by Title IV-E of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (“HEA”), as amended, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1087aa-1087hh. The terms of these notes required repayment beginning nine months after a student ceased carrying at least one-half of the normal full-time academic workload at an eligible institution. On July 1, 1977, Mena-tos ceased carrying at least one-half the normal full-time workload at UCLA. However, she commenced graduate studies at UCLA in September of 1977 and repayment of the loans was deferred. Menatos ended…

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.