Lowenschuss

Lowenschuss v. Selnick (In re Lowenschuss)

Good Law
171 F.3d 673·1999 WL 140740·41 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1049·1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 4249
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 1999No. 98-15292California6,045 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hall, J.

Fred Lowenschuss (“Debtor”) appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s November 1, 1996 order: (1) ruling that the Fred Lowen-schuss & Associates at Law Pension Plan (“Pension Plan”) was not ERISA qualified on the petition date, and was therefore not excluded from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 (c)(2); (2) ruling that Nevada law would be applied to determine whether Debtor’s interest in the Pension Plan was exempt from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 522 ; and (3) granting Beverly Selnick’s (“Selnick”) renewed motion for the appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee. The Pension Plan Trustee intervened in this appeal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we affirm.

BACKGROUND

On September 28, 1981, Selnick filed for divorce in the Pennsylvania courts. Almost ten years later, in July 1991, a Pennsylvania divorce court entered an order (the “Divorce Decree”) for the equitable distribution of the marital property of Debtor and Selnick. The Divorce Decree awarded Selnick, inter alia, an ownership interest in 38.7% of the assets of the Pension Plan. However, instead of transferring to Selnick her share of the Pension Plan…

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.