False Oath In Bankruptcy

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

• United States v. Greenstein
  153 F.2d 550· 2d Cir.· 1946-01-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court properly admitted the testimony.
• United States v. Moynagh
  566 F.2d 799· 1st Cir.· 1977-11-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a conviction based on a jury verdict where one specification was unsupported by evidence must be remanded for a new trial if the verdict is ambiguous. The court also vacated convictions for failure to list an assigned debt and for failing to list a creditor se
• Meer v. United States
  235 F.2d 65· 10th Cir.· 1956-07-11 ·cited 18×
  A conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 152 for making a false oath in a bankruptcy proceeding requires the false statement to be material to the inquiry. Count Three of the indictment failed to allege materiality, rendering it insufficient.
• United States v. Jessee
  605 F.2d 430· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding jury instructions, sufficiency of evidence, and preindictment delay were without merit.
• In re Robinson
  506 F.2d 1184· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that objections to a bankruptcy discharge were timely filed despite late payment of filing fees, and that the bankrupt's false testimony regarding accounts receivable was material and grounds for denying discharge.
• United States v. Stone
  282 F.2d 547· 2d Cir.· 1960-07-18 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction on Count 2, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict despite potential issues with Count 1.
• United States v. Weissman
  219 F.2d 837· 2d Cir.· 1955-03-01 ·cited 12×
  A conviction for concealing assets and making a false oath in bankruptcy requires proof of a manifested intent to create a debt, not merely the subjective intent of a sole shareholder.
• In re Luma Camera Serv., Inc.
  157 F.2d 951· 2d Cir.· 1946-11-11 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the contempt order, holding that circuit precedent compelled adherence to a presumption of continued possession despite its unreasonableness and the bankrupt's known inability to comply.
• In re Topper
  229 F.2d 691· 3d Cir.· 1956-01-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an actual fraudulent intent is required to deny a bankrupt's discharge under 18 U.S.C. § 152, and reliance on counsel's advice after full disclosure can negate such intent.
• Burchinal v. United States
  342 F.2d 982· 10th Cir.· 1965-03-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the jury's verdict for fraudulent transfer and false oath in contemplation of bankruptcy.
• United States v. Diorio
  451 F.2d 21· 2d Cir.· 1971-11-19 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction for making a false oath in a bankruptcy proceeding, finding the evidence sufficient and the jury instructions proper.
• Williamson v. Williams
  137 F.2d 298· 4th Cir.· 1943-07-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the bankrupt committed offenses punishable by imprisonment under the Bankruptcy Act by concealing assets and making a false oath, thus warranting denial of discharge.
• In re Moran
  456 F.2d 1030· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the debtor knowingly and fraudulently made a false oath by failing to list a creditor, justifying the denial of discharge.
• In re Jackson v. A. S. Menick in bankruptcy of Cecil M. Jackson
  271 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1959-11-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a bankrupt's discharge can be denied based on false financial statements, failure to explain asset diminution, and false oaths, even if some objections are amended after the statute of limitations has run.
• Wertz v. Rock-Ola Mfg. Co.
  329 F.2d 116· 4th Cir.· 1964-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence did not sufficiently establish that the bankrupt knowingly and fraudulently concealed assets or made a false oath, thus the discharge should not have been denied.
• Swicegood v. Ginn
  924 F.2d 230· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the debtor's knowing and fraudulent omission of material assets from his bankruptcy schedule constituted a false oath sufficient to deny discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A).
• Haught v. United States (In Re Haught)
  242 B.R. 522· M.D. Fla.· 1999-03-31
  The court held that the bankruptcy court did not err in denying the debtor's discharge because the omission of corporate affiliations from the Statement of Financial Affairs constituted a knowing, fraudulent, and material false oath.
• In re Laurence Semel
  479 F.2d 1269· 3d Cir.· 1973-06-27
  The court held that the district court did not err in vacating the referee's order granting discharge and denying discharge based on a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152.
• United States v. Spencer
  412 F.2d 798· 5th Cir.· 1969-06-06
  The court held that the indictment counts were not duplicitous and that the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion.
• Cowley v. Gertrude E. Gouvia
  368 F.2d 673· 5th Cir.· 1966-11-21
  The court held that a bankrupt is entitled to a proper review of the referee's decision, which requires a transcript or summary of the evidence to be transmitted to the district court.