FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
APR 25 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: WARREN CHARLES BODEKER, No. 15-35212
______________________________
D.C. No. 9:14-cv-00195-BMM
ROXSANNA RYAN, the personal
representative of the Estate of Warren
Charles Bodeker, MEMORANDUM*
Debtor-Appellant,
v.
CHRISTY L. BRANDON,
Trustee-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted April 5, 2017
Seattle, Washington
Before: KOZINSKI and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and TUNHEIM, Chief
District Judge.**
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable John R. Tunheim, Chief United States District Judge
for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.
Appellant Roxsanna Ryan appeals the district court’s reversal of the
bankruptcy court order granting Debtor Warren Charles Bodeker’s motion to
rescind his waiver of a homestead exemption which Bodeker agreed to as part of a
stipulation. We affirm.
First, Law v. Siegel is not a subsequent change in the law applicable to this
case because no court equitably surcharged Bodeker’s homestead. See 134 S. Ct.
1188, 1194S97 (2014). Even if Siegel applied, a subsequent change in law
generally does not provide a basis for a party to rescind a stipulation. In re
Marriage of Grace, 643 P.2d 1188, 1191S92 (Mont. 1982); see also Jeff D. v.
Andrus, 899 F.2d 753, 759 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that “enforcement of
settlement agreements [is] governed by principles of local law”).
Second, 11 U.S.C. § 522(e) only applies to the waiver of an exemption in
favor of a creditor with an “unsecured claim.” Trustee-Appellee Christy L.
Brandon is neither an unsecured creditor nor holds an unsecured claim. Any
incidental benefit to Bodeker’s creditors as a result of the stipulation does not
render § 522(e) applicable to this case.
AFFIRMED.
2