Shepherd v. Derwinski, s. 90-15911
| Decision Date | 01 April 1992 |
| Docket Number | 90-16670,Nos. 90-15911,s. 90-15911 |
| Citation | 961 F.2d 132 |
| Parties | Ronald SHEPHERD, on behalf of; and all in the State of Arizona similarly situated; Rollin Barkley, on behalf of; and all in the State of Arizona similarly situated; Robert A. Bricker; Marion Rodgers, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Edward J. DERWINSKI, Administrator of the Veterans' Administration, Defendant-Appellee. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rollin BARKLEY; Ronald Shepherd; Robert A. Bricker; Marion Rodgers, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
James M. Ackerman, Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, Phoenix, Ariz., for appellants.
Malcolm L. Stewart, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; Roger G. Strand, District Judge, Presiding.
Before: NORRIS, BEEZER, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
In this appeal, we decide whether the Arizona anti-deficiency law is preempted by Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) regulations that authorize the VA to collect deficiencies on VA-guaranteed home loans. Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. §§ 33-729 A, 33-814 G. Because the Arizona anti-deficiency law at issue here is identical to the Oregon anti-deficiency law we considered in Connelly v. Derwinski, 961 F.2d 129, 130 (9th Cir.1992), we hold, on the basis of that opinion, that Arizona's anti-deficiency law is preempted by 38 C.F.R. § 36.4323(e). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's summary judgment awarded to the Secretary of Veteran Affairs.
In a separate unpublished memorandum disposition, we also affirm the summary judgment against Barkley, who raised issues particular to his case.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carter v. Derwinski
...961 F.2d 129, 130 (9th Cir.1992) (Oregon foreclosure procedure forbidding any deficiency judgment preempted); Shepherd v. Derwinski, 961 F.2d 132 (9th Cir.1992) (same for Arizona). At the same time, however, Whitehead significantly restricted the scope of this indemnity right by holding the......
-
U.S. v. Rezzonico, Civ. 97-479-PCT-EHC.
...statute. Connelly, 961 F.2d at 132. Arizona's anti-deficiency statute next came under scrutiny by the Ninth Circuit. In Shepherd v. Derwinski, 961 F.2d 132 (9th Cir.1992), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 33-814, identical to the Oregon statute co......