Summary
In Birting Fisheries, the Ninth Circuit's short opinion references the three other circuits that had made similar findings, and states that it concurs with those decisions.
Summary of this case from In re First Alliance Mortg. Co.Opinion
No. 95-35345
Argued and Submitted July 12, 1996 — Seattle, Washington
Filed August 12, 1996
Ronald W. Goss, Shulkin Hutton Inc., P.S., Seattle, Washington, for appellant.
Scott Edward Collins, Helsell, Fetterman, Todd Hokanson, Seattle, Washington, for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding.
D.C. No. CV-94-01649-TSZ.
OPINION
[1] Debtor Birting Fisheries, Inc., appeals the district court's order, affirming a bankruptcy court order certifying a proof of claim filed by James Lane et al for themselves and a class comprised of present and former crewmembers of a fishing vessel owned by the debtor. The class certification is not itself challenged, only the proof of claim on behalf of the class. While the debtor makes a plausible argument that 11 U.S.C. § 501 does not allow the filing of a class proof of claim, we conclude that the bankruptcy code should be construed to allow class claims.
[2] Three circuits have previously considered this question, and all have construed the code as we do. Those courts have fully discussed the arguments and explained their decision. We concur.
Reid v. White Motor Corp., 886 F.2d 1462 (6th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1080, 110 S.Ct. 1809, 108 L.Ed.2d 939 (1990); In re Charter Co., 876 F.2d 866 (11th Cir. 1989), cert. dismissed, 496 U.S. 944, 110 S.Ct. 3232, 110 L.Ed.2d 678 (1990); In the Matter of American Reserve Corp., 840 F.2d 487 (7th Cir. 1988); cf. In re Standard Metals Corp., 817 F.2d 625 (10th Cir. 1987), vacated and reversed on other grounds sub. nom. Sheftelman v. Standard Metals Corp., 839 F.2d 1383 (10th Cir. 1987), cert. dismissed, 488 U.S. 881, 109 S.Ct. 201, 102 L.Ed.2d 171 (1988).
AFFIRMED.