Section 727(b) of the Bankruptcy Code provides for the discharge of debts that arose prior to the petition date.
Commercial Fraud Committee
Committees
The U.S. Supreme Court has, for four decades, been rocking the boat [that’s Justice Blackmun’s metaphor] on bankruptcy court authority. First, they almost killed the Code, coming within one vote of declaring the entire Bankruptcy Code unconstitutional. Then, they limit and mess with it some more.
Section 523(a)(2)(B) provides that an individual debtor’s debt is not discharged to the extent the debt was obtained by use of a statement in writing that (1) is materially false, (2) is respecting the debtor’s financial condition, (3) is one on which the creditor reasonably relied and (4) was caused by the debtor to be made or published with intent to deceive. Recently, in Privitera v.
Commingling of funds frequently occurs in fraud cases and is notably common in Ponzi scheme cases. It occurs when funds belonging to one party are deposited into the same bank account as funds that belong to a different party. Because money is fungible, it is not possible to trace exactly which dollars belong to which party if they reside in the same bank account.
On May 15, 2017, the Supreme Court in Midland Funding, LLC v.
When the trustee of a bankrupt company sues to avoid allegedly fraudulent transfers, one threshold element that he or she must generally show is that the transfer left the debtor with “unreasonably small capital.” Recent appeals in the SemCrude and Adelphia bankruptcy cases demonstrate that this a tough showing to make.
Section 544(b)(1) of the Code enables a trustee to “avoid any transfer of an interest of the debtor in property or any obligation incurred by the debtor that is voidable under applicable law by a creditor holding an unsecured claim that is allowable under section 502....”[1] Pursuant to § 544(b), a truste
In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found itself “obliged to explore some uncharted territory of Ohio substantive and procedural jurisprudence” arising out of fraudulent transfer and related claims from a Ponzi scheme.
In Meoli v. The Huntington National Bank (In re Teleservices Group Inc.),[1] the U.S.
Section 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that to the extent a debt is obtained by “false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud[,]” it is excepted from discharge.[1] In the past, many courts have read the phrase “false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud” as meaning only fraud made through misrepr
Co-Chair
Reid Collins & Tsai LLP
Austin, TX
(512) 647-6132
Co-Chair
Ice Miller LLC
New York, NY
(212) 835-6315
Education Director
Mourant Ozannes
Camana Bay,
Newsletter Editor
Jones Walker
New Orleans, LA
(504) 582-8641
Special Projects Leader
Alvarez & Marsal
Philadelphia, PA
(610) 715-1313