Jantz, et al. v. Karch (In re Karch)
- Citation:
- BAP No. CO-12-106 (10th Cir. B.A.P. October 15, 2011).
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- Concluding that it was proper to reverse and remand a bankruptcy court decision based on an intervening change in the applicable legal standard, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversed and remanded the bankruptcy court’s ruling for further proceedings in light of the Supreme Court decision in Bullock v. BankChampaign, N.A.
- Procedural context:
- In the chapter 13 case of a probate estate trustee, beneficiaries of the trust sought an order of nondischargeability under § 523(a)(4) for their claims against the trustee for “fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity.” Based on then-existing precedent, the bankruptcy concluded that the debts were nondischargeable notwithstanding that the trustee acted without any intent to breach his fiduciary duty. Subsequently, the United States Supreme Court concluded in Bullock v. BankChampaign, N.A., 133 S.Ct. 1754 (2013) that § 523(a)(4) in fact requires “a culpable state of mind…involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the relevant fiduciary behavior.” The appellant filed this appeal, which the appellee did not contest. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel remanded for further proceedings as necessary to determine whether the trustee acted with the requisite level of intent.
- Facts:
- See above.
- Judge(s):
- Michael, Nugent, and Somers.
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!
