11 U.S.C. § 523(A)(4)

12 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Francine Klingman v. Levinson
  831 F.2d 1292· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a consent judgment's stipulations, clearly indicating the parties' intent to be bound in future bankruptcy proceedings, satisfy the 'actually litigated' requirement for collateral estoppel, making the debt nondischargeable.
• In re Halpern v. First Ga. Bank
  810 F.2d 1061· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-20 ·cited 21×
  The bankruptcy court properly applied collateral estoppel to the factual findings in a state court consent judgment to determine nondischargeability of a debt.
• Francine Klingman v. Levinson
  877 F.2d 1357· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-28 ·cited 14×
  A bankruptcy court can use Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) to correct an omission in a prior judgment to reflect its original intent that the entire state court judgment, including pre-petition interest, was nondischargeable.
• In re Compton v. Compton
  891 F.2d 1180· 5th Cir.· 1990-01-16 ·cited 8×
  A creditor's actual knowledge of bankruptcy proceedings, even without formal notice of filing deadlines, is sufficient to bar the late filing of a complaint objecting to the dischargeability of a debt.
• Belisle v. Plunkett
  877 F.2d 512· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-06 ·cited 6×
  A bankruptcy trustee, using the strong-arm powers under 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3), can bring property held in constructive trust for victims of fraud into the bankruptcy estate, even if 11 U.S.C. § 541(d) might otherwise exclude it. The trustee's rights are not dependent on a prior t
• In re Wallace v. Wallace
  840 F.2d 762· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that collateral estoppel applies to factual issues decided in a state court judgment when determining debt dischargeability in bankruptcy, provided the issues were actually litigated and necessarily decided.
• In re Chandler v. Chandler
  805 F.2d 555· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-09 ·cited 6×
  A debtor in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy may not discharge monthly retirement benefit payments awarded to his former spouse by a divorce decree, as these payments are the sole property of the former spouse.
• In re Allman v. Allman
  735 F.2d 863· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that agreed state court judgments, which did not contain specific factual findings of fraud or false pretenses, were insufficient to collaterally estop a bankruptcy court from determining the dischargeability of a debt.
• Harris v. Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md. (In Re Harris)
  7 B.R. 284· S.D. Fla.· 1980-10-25 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the modification of the automatic stay but reversed the declaratory judgment regarding non-dischargeability, finding it was improvidently entered without sufficient evidence or consideration.
• Fuller v. Johannessen
  180 B.R. 682· M.D. Fla.· 1995-03-27 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's dismissal of the debtors' claims, holding that the debtors failed to state causes of action for nondischargeability under the relevant Bankruptcy Code sections.
• Vinhas v. Banoub
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-14
  The court held that the bankruptcy court erred in determining the 'operative complaint' referred to the state court action, but correctly found the debtors defaulted on the settlement agreement.
• McDowell v. Stein
  415 B.R. 584· S.D. Fla.· 2009-01-20
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's order granting summary judgment, holding that the debtor was collaterally estopped from contesting the dischargeability of debt based on prior New York court findings of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty.