In Re Jack R. Armstrong, Dba Armstrong Construction, Debtor. Jack F. Staten and M. Jane Staten v. Jack R. Armstrong

95 F.3d 1156 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Jack R. ARMSTRONG, dba Armstrong Construction, Debtor. Jack F. STATEN and M. Jane Staten, Plaintiffs-Appellants, Cross-Appellees, v. Jack R. ARMSTRONG, Defendant-Appellee, Cross-Appellant. No. 95-15510, 95-15595. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 14, 1996. Decided Aug. 23, 1996. 1 Before: PREGERSON and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and WINMILL, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** Introduction 3 Appellants Jack and Jane Staten appeal from a decision rendered by the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. Appellee Jack Armstrong had contracted to construct the Statens' home in Nevada, and in the resulting litigation, the Nevada state court entered judgment against Armstrong. Subsequently, Armstrong filed bankruptcy, and the Statens sought to have their judgment declared nondischargeable on a theory of fraud. The Bankruptcy Court granted the Statens' motion for…