Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Shepherd v. Derwinski

Shepherd v. Derwinski, 961 F.2d 132 (9th Cir. 1992)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1992-04-01
Topic: general

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.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Shepherd v. Derwinski. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 4 opinions

SHEPHERD v. DERWINSKI,961 F.2d 132(9th Cir. 1992)

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.

Nos. 90-15911, 90-16670.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted December 10, 1991.

Decided April 1, 1992.

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.Page 133

Before: NORRIS, BEEZER, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

[1] 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 inConnelly 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.

[2] In a separate unpublished memorandum disposition, we also affirm the summary judgment against Barkley, who raised issues particular to his case.

[3] AFFIRMED.