is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that: 1. The order dismissing case no. 95-03110 is SET ASIDE; 2. The order granting the motion for relief from stay (filed by Jim Walter Homes) in case no. 95-03110 is SET ASIDE; 3. A discharge shall be granted to the debtor in case no. 95-03110 for his successful completion of all payments under his confirmed plan; 4. Jim Walter Homes’ Motion to Dismiss in the pending case is DENIED; and 5. Jim Walter Homes’ Objection to Confirmation in the pending case is OVERRULED. A separate confirmation order will be entered in this case. 1 . At the time of the hearing, the debtor admitted that the home was uninsured. Shortly after the heari scretion in deciding whether to dismiss under § 109(g)(2). E.g., In re Luna, 122 B.R. 575, 577 (9th Cir. BAP 1991) (<HOLDING>); In re Copman, 161 B.R. 821, 823-24
holding that the discretionary function does not apply where the decisionmaker lacks authority recognizing that the application of a retroactive amendment is discretionary holding that discretionary immunity does not apply where plaintiff alleged facts that if true constituted a breach of states duty of reasonable care holding that  109g2 does not apply when there was no unresolved motion pending at the time when the debtor sought dismissal holding that  109g2 is discretionary and does not apply if mechanical application would lead to unwarranted results