Guerra & Moore Ltd. v. Cantu (In re Cantu)

Citation:
400 B.R. 104 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2008), no cite at the district court level, no cite at the Fifth Circuit
Tag(s):
Ruling:
State court judgment for intentional interference with a lawfirm's contract with a client did not establish a "willful and malicious injury" that, under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(6), bars discharge of the judgment. The claimant failed to establish either the "objective" or "subjective" prong of the "willful and malicious injury" inquiry.
Procedural context:
Summary judgment
Facts:
Claimant was a lawfirm that filed a lawsuit against the Debtor, a rival lawyer, alleging that the Debtor tortiously interfered with both a contract and prospective contract that the Claimant had with clients. Following trial, the jury found: (1) the Debtor intentionally interferred with the Claimant's contract and (2) an award o $1.6 million would fairly and reasonably compensate the Claimant "for its damages proximately caused by [the Debtor's] interference." The jury, however, did not answer whether it found "that the harm to [Claimant] resulted from malice" where malice was defined to mean "a specific intent by [the Debtor] to cause substantial injury to [the Claimant]."
Judge(s):
King, Davis and Clement, Circuit Judges.

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

3523 Summarized

5 Being Processed