In re Jawad
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
2006 WL 6810985 (2006)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
Samey Jawad (debtor) entered a finance lease with Michael R. White and Associates (White) (creditor) to lease a modular office. Under the finance lease, White would purchase the office from a third-party vendor in two installments: $17,000 once the lease was signed, and $19,805 once the vendor delivered the modular office to Jawad. Jawad would then make monthly payments to White over a 60-month period, totaling nearly $79,000. The lease stated that Jawad would assume the risk of loss upon delivery. However, the lease had an addendum that deemed the office accepted upon execution of the lease, rather than upon delivery. The lease was signed, and White paid the initial $17,000 to the vendor. However, the vendor never delivered the modular office to Jawad. Through a series of events, Jawad recovered some money for White, paid some money to White, and ended up filing for bankruptcy twice. By the second bankruptcy proceeding, White had already received almost $24,000. Still, White made a claim against Jawad for the remaining unpaid lease money, interest, and attorneys’ fees. If White received the entire amount of its latest claim, White would receive a total of nearly $49,000 for its initial advance of $17,000. Jawad objected to White’s claim, arguing that enforcement of the lease would be unconscionable. White argued that the risk of loss for non-delivery fell on Jawad, not on White. The bankruptcy court disallowed White’s claim, finding that it was unconscionable. White appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Russell, J.)
Dissent (Montali, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.