Martin v. Hauck (In re Hauck)
- Citation:
- unreported
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The Tenth Circuit made two findings concerning waived arguments. First, because the argument was not raised before the bankruptcy court, the Court of Appeals rejected Debtors' contention that they did not intend originally to admit liability in their stipulation. Second, because the Debtors did not raise before the Court of Appeals an issue considered by the district court--that the stipulation contravened the Bankruptcy Code's limitation on reaffirmation agreements--neither would that argument be considered.
- Procedural context:
- Ms. Martin moved for summary judgment on 11 USC 523(a)(2) and (a)(4) based on the state court stipulation. The bankruptcy court granted the motion, citing the Restatement of Judgments for the fact that stipulations meet the "actually litigated" prong for preclusion. The Haucks appealed to district court, which affirmed the bankruptcy court decision. Debtors then appealed pro se to the Court of Appeals, where the Haucks further argued they either did not understand the contents of the stipulation they signed or they did not intend to admit liability.
- Facts:
- Woman sold home to couple and subsequently sued them for fraud and other torts in state court. Ms. Martin obtained a default judgment which was subsequently vacated, but the parties ultimately settled the litigation with a stipulation as to liability and an agreement to pay $200,000. The Haucks subsequently filed bankruptcy and sought to discharge this liability. Ms. Martin filed an adversary, asserting that Debtors were precluded from denying non-dischargeability based on the state court stipulation. Debtors disputed that the "actually litigated" requirement of preclusion analysis was present from a mere stipulation to liability.
- Judge(s):
- Lucero, Brorby, Bacharach
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!
