Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
"[S]ometimes a debtor is liable for fraud that she did not personally commit," held the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 22, 2023, when the debtor's business partner had deceptively obtained money by fraud, thereby making the innocent partner liable for a nondischargeable debt under Bankruptcy Code (Code) §523(a)(2)(A) ("any debt from money "obtained by … fraud" not dischargeable and survives debtor's bankruptcy). Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, 2023 WL 2144417 (Feb. 22, 2023). Unanimously affirming the Ninth Circuit and resolving "confusion in the lower courts," the Court explained that the common law and precedent precluded an innocent debtor from discharging a debt obtained by the fraud of the debtor's agent or partner. Id. at *8. The innocent debtor here thus could not use bankruptcy to avoid liability. More important, the decision has practical significance for corporate officers and others in an agency or partnership relationship. The decision also may have serious consequences for corporate Chapter 11 debtors whenever a "domestic governmental unit" is a creditor.
|The Circuits have been split as to whether an innocent business partner's liability could be discharged in bankruptcy. See, e.g., In re M.M. Winkler & Assoc., 241 F.3d 746, 749 (5th Cir. 2001) (debts that arise from fraud cannot be discharged); In re Villa, 261 F.3d 1148, 1151 (11th Cir. 2001) (debt cannot be discharged when fraud is imputed to the debtor under agency principles). But see, Sullivan v. Glenn, 782 F.3d 378, 381 (7th Cir. 2015) (debt non-dischargeable only if debtor knew or should have known of fraud); In re Walker, 726 F.2d 452, 454 (8th Cir. 1984) (same).
|The debtor (D) and her contractor "then-boyfriend" bought a house "as business partners," intending to renovate and to resell the property. D "was largely uninvolved" in the renovation directed by her partner. When selling the house to the plaintiff (P), the debtor and her boyfriend-later-husband completed a mandatory disclosure statement, falsely claiming they knew of no leaks or other defects and that the necessary repairs on the property had been made under applicable law.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.