Connelly v. Derwinski

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 4369·961 F.2d 129·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 5557·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2768
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 1, 199289-35543California1,428 words

Opinion

Opinion

961 F.2d 129 Michael L. CONNELLY; Peter Mason; Thomas P. Jones; Lawrence J. Walsh; David L. Burrows, individually and on behalf of all others in the State of Oregon similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Edward J. DERWINSKI, Secretary, Veterans Affairs; United States of America; Veterans Administration, Defendants-Appellees. No. 89-35543. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 10, 1991. Decided April 1, 1992. David A. Leen, Leen & Moore, Seattle, Wash., and Margaretta Eakin, Portland, Or., for plaintiffs-appellants. Malcolm L. Stewart, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Before: NORRIS, BEEZER, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judge: 1 We are asked to determine, once again, whether a state anti-deficiency scheme is preempted by Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) regulations that authorize the VA to collect deficiencies on VA-guaranteed home loans. This case involves Oregon law, which forbids a deficiency judgment after either a judicial or a non-judicial foreclosure sale. See Or.Rev.Stat. § 86.770(2). In…

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.