Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

In re Arnold & Baker Farms

United States Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit
85 F.3d 1415 (1996)


Facts

Arnold & Baker Farms (A&B) (defendant) purchased 1,440 acres from Philip and Dorothy Ladra in the 1970s and provided them a first deed of trust on the property. Between 1978 and 1983, the Farmers Home Administration (Farmers) (plaintiff) provided financing to A&B for crops and also loaned money to A&B so that it could make installment payments to the Ladras. In return, Farmers was provided a second deed of trust on the property. A&B began experiencing financial difficulties in the 1970s. The Ladras began foreclosure proceedings in the mid-1980s. In April 1986, A&B filed a Chapter 11 petition under the Bankruptcy Code. In May 1986, the bankruptcy court approved a sale of 840 acres to two entities, Cardon Oil Company (Cardon) and the Corks. On account of the sale, A&B was then able to satisfy the Ladras’s secured claim. Cardon and the Corks both defaulted on their notes to A&B. In settlement, they transferred back most of the land that A&B had sold to them. At this point, Farmers now held a $3,837,618 note secured by a first deed of trust in 1,320 acres of A&B property. In 1991, A&B filed a reorganization plan in which it proposed to transfer 515 acres to Farmers in satisfaction of Farmers’ secured claim. A&B estimated the value of the land to be $7,300 per acre, or $3,759,500 for the 515 acres. Farmers objected, claiming that the land was worth only $1,381 per acre. In 1993, the court approved the plan with the modification that Farmers receive 10 percent more acreage. Farmers appealed to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP), which reversed the plan confirmation. A&B appealed that decision.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Norris, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 202,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.