In Re Theodore Steven Roosevelt, Debtor. Finalco, Inc. v. Theodore Steven Roosevelt

Caution
96 Daily Journal DAR 12875·98 F.3d 1169·1996 WL 612668·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 27471·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7797
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 199695-55160California368 words

Opinion

Opinion

The opinion filed on June 10,1996, appearing at 87 F.3d 311 (9th Cir.1996), is amended as follows:

Page 313, column one, penultimate line: delete “all of’; last line: delete “community” column two, paragraph 1, line 2: change “be” to “become”, delete “transmuted into” line 3: delete “Bankruptcy Appellate Panel” and insert “trial court” line 6: add a new sentence reading “Steven has not appealed that finding.”

Page 314, column one, footnote 3, lines 3 & 4: delete “community property” and insert “separate property of one spouse”; change “either” to “the other”; line 5: change “(a)” to “(c)” column two, line 16: change “community” to “separate” line 33: insert a period between “property” and the closing quotation mark; delete “or ‘community property.’ ”

Page 315, column two, line 1: change “denied” to “granted”

Page 318, column two, first paragraph, line 6: after “discharged.” insert “Steven’s argument neglects to mention, however, that this rule of construction is usually only applied in favor of honest debtors. See Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 286-87 , 111 S.Ct. 654, 659-60 , 112 L.Ed.2d 755 (1991). At the same time, it is not entirely clear how this general rule applies to…

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.