⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit hears oral argument in In re Koehler, a bankruptcy appeal that turns on whether a debtor's homestead exemption was validly waived during an earlier Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding. The appellant, proceeding pro se, argues that he never agreed to waive his California homestead exemption and never signed any document consenting to that waiver. He contends that the bankruptcy court erred in sustaining a trustee's objection to his exemption claim after the case converted to Chapter 7. The appellee trustee counters that the debtor, through his attorney, entered into a binding stipulation during the Chapter 13 case that resolved multiple pending motions—including an objection to exemptions—and that in exchange the debtor obtained significant benefits, including a waiver of an appeal bond to pursue a state court appeal. The panel must decide whether that stipulation, embodied in a court order, effectively waived the debtor's homestead protection even though the debtor now disputes both his consent and the existence of a signed waiver document. At stake is the interaction between bankruptcy exemption law, the finality of court orders, and the scope of an attorney's authority to bind a client.

In re Koehler (No. 25-1110) — United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit, argued July 16, 2026.