K & S Diversified Investments, Inc. v. Cheng

Ninth Circuit

K & S Diversified Investments, Inc. v. Cheng

160 F. App'x 644

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 23, 2005

DocketNo. 04-55741

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 160 F. App'x 644 (K & S Diversified Investments, Inc. v. Cheng) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

K & S Diversified Investments, Inc. v. Cheng, 160 F. App'x 644 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

*

As the parties are familiar with the facts and the procedural history of the case, we go at once to the dispositive issue. The Chengs acted as debtors when they filed the Lien Motion to protect their homestead exemption. The Chengs acted as debtors-in-possession when they filed an Objection to the K & S claim. As they acted in a different capacity they were not estopped by representations made as debtors. Moreover, it would be inequitable to allow K & S to assert its increased claim without the Chengs having opportunity to challenge it. Consequently, the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel is AFFIRMED, and, in accordance with the judgment, the case is REMANDED to the Bankruptcy Court.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

*

As the parties are familiar with the facts and the procedural history of the case, we go at once to the dispositive issue. The Chengs acted as debtors when they filed the Lien Motion to protect their homestead exemption. The Chengs acted as debtors-in-possession when they filed an Objection to the K & S claim. As they acted in a different capacity they were not estopped by representations made as debtors. Moreover, it would be inequitable to allow K & S to assert its increased claim without the Chengs having opportunity to challenge it. Consequently, the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel is AFFIRMED, and, in accordance with the judgment, the case is REMANDED to the Bankruptcy Court.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 F. App'x 644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/k-s-diversified-investments-inc-v-cheng-ca9-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack