windows as personal property, an agreement on which Wells Fargo relied when determining what steps were necessary to protect its security interest in the property. Although the agreement between the parties is not binding on any third party without notice of the agreement, it is binding as between the only two parties to this particular dispute, Debtors and Wells Fargo. IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED that Debtors’ Objection to Claim # 22 of Wejls Fargo Financial National Bank is overruled. 1 . Doc. 45. 2 . 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(B). 3 .Doc. 63. 4 . Id. at ¶ 13. 5 . Proof of Claim No. 3. 6 .Proof of Claim No. 22. 7 . Objection to Claim # 22 of Wells Fargo Financial National Bank (Doc. 45). 8 . See Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48, 54-55, 99 S.Ct. 914, 59 L.Ed.2d 136 (1979) (<HOLDING>). 9 . 298 B.R. 382, 387 (Bankr.W.D.Mo.2003)
holding that in a noncore proceeding a bankruptcy court may enter final orders with the consent of all the parties to the proceeding holding that when a state  files a proof of claim in a bankruptcy proceeding the state waives its eleventh amendment immunity with regard to the bankruptcy estates claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the states claim recognizing rule that state law governs the substance of claims in bankruptcy proceedings holding that in a bankruptcy proceeding state law governs the rights of the parties with regard to interests in property holding state law governs property interests in bankruptcy proceedings unless some federal interest requires a different result  