In re: ALEXANDRA M. SPIEGEL v. Wright Grandchildren, L.p.; Michael Wright

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: ALEXANDRA M. SPIEGEL,
Debtor,
ALEXANDRA M. SPIEGEL;
STILLWATER RANCH
DEVELOPMENT; SUSAN DIDRIKSEN,
Chapter 7 trustee for the estate of
Alexandra M. Spiegel,
Appellants,
v.
WRIGHT GRANDCHILDREN, L.P.;
MICHAEL WRIGHT,
Appellees,
STEPHEN HUNG,
Interested Party.
No. 11-60024
BAP No. 10-1228
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
Kirscher, Hollowell, and Dunn, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding
FILED
NOV 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

** The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge for the U.S. Court of
International Trade, sitting by designation.
2
Argued and Submitted October 16, 2012
San Francisco, California
Before: WALLACE and BEA, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge.**
Having considered the plain language of the contract, as well as the evidence
offered to prove the intention of the parties, see Jones-Hamilton Co. v. Beazer
Materials & Services, Inc., 973 F.2d 688, 692 (9th Cir. 1992), we hold that the
release clause in the contract between Spiegel and Wright Grandchildren L.P. is
not ambiguous. It should therefore be interpreted in accordance with its plain
language, giving effect to all of its provisions. Cal. Civ. Code § 1638 (Deering
2012); Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1858 (Deering 2012). The clause required Wright
Grandchildren L.P., upon the sale of the Improved Property, to release the
Improved Property if Spiegel tendered $150,000. Consistent with this decision, the
case is reversed and remanded for the bankruptcy court to make any necessary
findings to resolve the competing claims of the parties. REVERSED AND
REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --