The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
lawyers rate this bankruptcy plan to get rid of fraud claims
| cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency | 03/24/25 |
| cruel-hearted state | 03/24/25 |
| cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency | 03/24/25 |
| greedy painfully honest box office stock car | 03/24/25 |
| cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency | 03/24/25 |
| Abnormal Aromatic Stage Haunted Graveyard | 03/24/25 |
| Dashing internet-worthy toaster | 03/24/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: March 24th, 2025 4:57 PM Author: cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency party A sues party B for fraud and alleges all kinds of wilful and intentional behavior on party B's part.
party B enters into a settlement agreement with party A to settle the claim.
party B breaches the settlement agreement by failing to pay amounts owed under it.
Party A now has a breach of contract claim against party B.
Party A gets a judgment against party B for the amount of the settlement.
Party B discharges the amount owed to Party A as part of a bankruptcy filing because its based on breach of contract, while Party B could not have done so to get rid of the intentional tort claim.
Is there a flaw in this analysis?
Do defendants do this? |
Date: March 24th, 2025 5:02 PM Author: cruel-hearted state I have a client in Party A's position. We were never notified of the BK before the bar date, so i think we'll get out without being discharged. But if he notified us he probably would have been able to do that (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778188) |
 |
Date: March 24th, 2025 5:05 PM Author: cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency looks like theres a bunch of exceptions to discharge where the court is allowed to look at the claims a settlement agreement is settling before discharging a breach of K claim so it may not work after all (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778195) |
|
Date: March 24th, 2025 5:08 PM Author: greedy painfully honest box office stock car wouldn’t party a still have a tort claim but for the effectiveness of a valid release through which the payments were structured? and wouldn’t the validity of that release likely hinge upon party b’s performance of those payments? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778203) |
|
Date: March 24th, 2025 5:20 PM Author: cream bull headed keepsake machete national security agency yea i think this is right (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778248) |
|
Date: March 24th, 2025 7:15 PM Author: Abnormal Aromatic Stage Haunted Graveyard Depends on the language of the satisfaction agreement. It's fairly common to see that the release of the claim depends on actual performance (usually including payment). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778588) |
|
Date: March 24th, 2025 5:21 PM Author: Dashing internet-worthy toaster I dropped out of law school after 10 days but I believe this is hearsay OP (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5699143&forum_id=2#48778255) |