Now Updating
In re: JERSEY CITY COMMUNITY HOUSING CORP

Summarizing by Amir Shachmurove

Fo-Farmer's Outlet, Inc v. Daniell (In re Daniell)

Citation:
B.A.P. 9th Cir. Nov. 6, 2013
Tag(s):
Ruling:
The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel held that (i) FFO failed to meet the fraud standard because it did not allege that the fraud occurred at the time the transaction was entered into with the Debtor, (ii) FFO did not pursue collection remedies, and (iii) the Debtor did not intend to cause "willful" and "malicious" injury to FFO.
Procedural context:
The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit AFFIRMED the ruling of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California.
Facts:
Fo-Farmers Outlet, Inc. ("FFO") was a supplier that supplied packing materials for produce. Derrick Clinton Daniell (the "Debtor") was a produce contractor. FFO entered into a credit agreement with the Debtor. The Debtor sent FFO a memorandum regarding the aniticpated packing materials needed. FFO alleged that it learned that the Debtor's contacts in Mexico for the produce were false and that the Debtor would not get any of the proceeds from the sale of the Mexican crops to pay for the packaging materials. FFO sued the Debtor pre-petition and received a state court judgment in which the balance is alleged to have been $224,650.62 by FFO. The Debtor filed chapter 7 bankruptcy. FFO sued the Debtor seeking an exception to discharge pursuant to section 523(a)(2)(A) and 523(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Bankruptcy Court dismissed FFO's complaint and FFO appealed to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit.
Judge(s):
Pappas, Jury, and Kirscher

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!

About us in numbers

3644 in the system

3524 Summarized

4 Being Processed