Prince, supra. In In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526, 532 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1996), the bankruptcy court of this district held that the trustee waived his right to object to the bank's claim when he was given a full and fair opportunity to object and voluntarily chose not to do so. "Waiver may be found where a party fails to raise an issue, despite a full and fair opportunity to do so." Id. The Armstrong case was cited in another case in this district in which the court held that by failing to resist the trustee's request to convert the proceeding from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7, the debtor waived any objection to the conversion.
Waiver may be found where a party fails to raise an issue, despite a full and fair opportunity to do so. In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526, 532 (Bankr. D.Neb. 1996). Therefore, AFY has consented to the conversion, or at least waived any right to object to it, and the motion should be granted.
Yates v. Forker (In re Patriot Co.),311 B.R. 71, 74 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2004). See also In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526, 532 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1996) (stating that waiver may be found where a party fails to raise an issue despite a full and fair opportunity to do so). --------
Waiver may be found where a party fails to raise an issue, despite a full and fair opportunity to do so. In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526, 532 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1996). Therefore, AFY has consented to the conversion, or at least waived any right to object to it, and the motion should be granted.
Prior reported decisions in this case set forth many facts relating to the underlying thirteen-year-old bankruptcy case and related adversary proceedings. See In re Armstrong, 931 F.2d 1233 (8th Cir.1991) (hereinafter "Armstrong I ") affirming 93 B.R. 197 (Bankr.D.Neb.1988), 97 B.R. 565 (Bankr.D.Neb.1989), and 127 B.R. 852 (D.Neb.1989); see also Abbott Bank v. Armstrong, 44 F.3d 665 (8th Cir.1995) (hereinafter "Armstrong II"); see also In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526 (Bankr.D.Neb.1996) (hereinafter "Armstrong 1996"). I take judicial notice of these prior decisions and of all proceedings in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and related adversary proceedings.
Pereira, 921 F. Supp. at 1124. The significance of In re Fill and Pereira is best highlighted when it is juxtaposed with In re Armstrong, 201 B.R. 526 (Bankr.D.Neb. 1996), a similar bankruptcy case but with a different outcome. In In re Armstrong, a creditor moved to object to the debtor's discharge.