California Student Aid Commission v. Williams

Good Law
9 F. App'x 696
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 2001No. 99-17440; D.C. Nos. CV 98-05119-REC CV 96-01279-REC; BKCY No. 96-12219-A-7FCalifornia814 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

During his Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings, Appellant Douglas Dee Williams (“Williams”) sought discharge of his student loans under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8)(B). Under that provision, the bankruptcy court had to determine whether Appellant would be subjected to “undue hardship” if he were required to repay those loans. The bankruptcy court held that repayment of his loans would impose such a hardship on Appellant, but the district court reversed.

“ ‘Because this court is in as good a position as the district court to review the findings of the bankruptcy court, it independently reviews the bankruptcy court’s decision.’ ” In re Pena, 155 F.3d 1108, 1110 (9th Cir.1998) (quoting Ragsdale v. Haller, 780 F.2d 794, 795 (9th Cir.1986)). In this circumstance, this court does not give deference to the district court’s decision. Preblich v. Battley, 181 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir.1999). This court reviews de novo the bankruptcy court’s conclusions of law and reviews its findings of fact for clear error. In re Pena, 155 F.3d at 1110 . “Review under the clearly erroneous standard is significantly deferential, requiring a ‘definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been…

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.