In Re Charles S. Riley, Jr., Cheryl A. Riley, Debtors. Runge Furniture v. Charles S. Riley, Jr., Cheryl A. Riley

944 F.2d 909 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re Charles S. RILEY, Jr., Cheryl A. Riley, Debtors. RUNGE FURNITURE, Appellant, v. Charles S. RILEY, Jr., Cheryl A. Riley, Appellees. No. 90-35867. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 28, 1991. Decided Sept. 17, 1991. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and KOELSCH and THOMAS G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 We are clear that the Bankruptcy Appellant Panel was correct in its reasoning disposing of the points urged by Runge Furniture and in its determination that this court's decision in the case of In re Matthews, 724 F.2d 798 (9th Cir.1984), was dispositive of the instant controversy and required decision for Charles S. Riley, Jr. and Cheryl A., his wife, the bankruptcy debtors. 3 The conclusion is manifest that each of the successive purchase money security agreements effected material changes in its predecessor: the sum owing Runge Furniture Co., the creditor, was…