Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!) (updated: 04/28/2015)

Welcome to the Bankruptcy Forum. Bankruptcy (BK) Forum is known as BKForum.com and will be referred to as BKF hereinafter. In order to ensure a long term success of our vibrant community, we have established certain rules and guidelines to which everyone must adhere to. Please take your time to carefully read our rules, before you start to participate in the community.

Things you agree to do:
BKFORUM.com (BKF) users agree to use the search function before starting a new thread. This prevents duplicate discussions and allows for better organized topics.

All BKF users agree to read the sticky posts which may be available at the top of a forum page. These Sticky posts often contain valuable information. They may also outline more rules and guidelines specific for that particular forum, stickies are put in place by that forums moderator(s) or admin(s).

Things you agree not to do:

All BKF users agree not to call people names or write a post simply to make a personal attack, or get a negative reaction; this behavior is not allowed on our forum. The use of derogatory language aimed at anyone will be severely dealt with. There is no need to agree with each other, or to even like each other. However, by signing onto BKForum.com you agree to treat each member and guest with the respect they deserve. No threats or personal attacks will be allowed.

All BKF users agree not to discuss, engage, or encourage any behavior or activity which violates the law. Discussion of drugs, violence, murder, theft, vandalism, fraud or any other issue which could be used to help individuals break the law is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to "bump" old threads, unless there is a specific benefit to the community by doing so. But in most cases, please don't post in very old threads, instead start new threads.

All BKF users agree not to attempt/use another members account. It is against BKF rules to use any account other than your own. Impersonating another member will result in an immediate ban. It is also against the rules to open more than one account in your own name without permission from a moderator or administrator. If you have been banned for any reason, it is against the rules to open another account. If you were banned temporarily and you are caught using another account you will be banned permanently. Choosing a moniker which is similar in either sound or spelling as a moderator or administrator is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to private message any moderator, admin, or other member with questions related to their personal circumstances (Questions about the forum or issues with the forum are ok). This forum only works when members share their experience and insights with everyone.

Things you agree not to post:
All BKF users agree not to post any derogatory/racist/or sexist remarks. This includes attachments, links and all information contained within posts, signatures, and avatars, failure to comply with this rule will result in a permanent ban.

All BKF users agree not to post any copyrighted or trademarked information without the express written permission of the owner(s) / proper citation of source.

All BKF users agree not to post any real names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, social security numbers, or any other personal details (their own or other people's).

All BKF users agree not to post links, pictures, attachments, videos, or the like of pornographic content, objectionable material or extreme violence, whether cartoon or real.

All BKF users agree not to use BKF for advertising purposes without a written contract between yourself/company/agent and the administration of BKF. Blatant advertising will result in a ban.

All BKF users agree not to spam the forums. Spam includes but is not limited to posting erroneous, non-relevant-useless, off-topic, or meaningless posts. Spam may also include posts which contain no text, or large areas of blank space between lines. Simply posting emoticons without text is considered spam. BKF is the largest bankruptcy message board and all the content is intended to help other users. Please help us improve the quality of our forum by making sure that your posts are well-worded, spell checked, grammatically correct and syntaxed.

Regarding actions of moderators and administrators:

The forum is no place to air out your opinion or be judgmental of our staff and its capabilities.

All BKF users agree not to abuse or mistreat moderators or administrators. It is against BKF rules to post any information regarding bans or any other action taken by a member of the moderating or administrative team. If you wish to discuss bans or warnings please do so via PM. To place a complaint against a moderator, send a PM to a super moderator. All Moderators are equal, any decision made by a moderator must be adhered to. If a moderator tells you something you do not like, do not go to another moderator looking for a different answer. If you are caught doing this you will be banned. The moderators work as a team and respect the decisions made by their peers and will help enforce them unless an administrator tells them differently.
If you have an issue with how the forum is run, then notify one of our administrator and we will look into the situation. We have in the past and still do appreciate any input that you offer this forum. But critical input and/or judgmental postings towards the staff will result in you getting banned.


Should you find a thread offensive or out of line, then notify a Mod in a PM so they can evaluate the situation and do the action deemed necessary.

All moderators do have active "other" lives outside of the forum and help moderate this forum in their spare time throughout the days and weeks.

If you have a problem with a member or Mod follow the proper channels of reporting it.

BKF reserves the right to delete any posts which contain anti-BKF comments or discussion. Any bashing of moderators or administrators, or any of their discussion or actions will also be deleted, and the responsible posting party(s) will be banned. Any public anti-BKF advertising, communication, or posts on another forum will result in permanent bans as well.

All warnings and bans are decided by individual moderators and administrators. Warnings are preferable to bans however, for serious offenses and repeat abusers bans will go into effect. The length of the bans can vary from several hours to permanent.

All messages posted or sent including through PM are the property of BKforum.com.

All BKF users agree not to advertiser on the forum (Niether by posting, private messaging or using your signature). If you are a company/attorney/legal adviser wishing to advertise on the site or sell a product, you must contact the head administrator and inquire about our advertising packages.

All bankruptcy related opinions expressed on BKForum.com are those of their authors and not necessarily of BKF, its staff or representatives.

You agree not to copy any material/post/content from BKF without written permission from our head administrator .

By posting on this forum you agree to these terms and conditions, including any punishment deemed appropriate by moderators or administrators in the event of an offense.

Administrators/Moderators can change these rules at any time without prior notice.
See more
See less

AP notice received today ... scared ... stressed ... long story thanks for helping

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I wish I could help, but I am totally out of my realm. Good wishes!
    "To go bravely forward is to invite a miracle."

    "Worry is the darkroom where negatives are formed."

    Comment


    • Thanks anyhow.
      Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

      Comment


      • Originally posted by scbendel View Post
        If anyone can point me to some Arizona case law regarding conversion and 523(a)(6), that would be awesome. I'm trying to polish this off by tomorrow as the deadline for submission is Friday.

        Thanks again.
        There isn't a LOT of caselaw because, from what I read, the "willful AND intentional" part in 523(a)(6) is hard to define. As you have found, there is some precedence from the Supreme Court in Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 118 S.Ct. 974, 523 U.S. 57 (1998). The best summary, from the SCOTUS precedence in Gieger is that they found that "Section 523(a)(6)'s words strongly support the Eighth Circuit's reading that only acts done with the actual intent to cause injury fall within the exception's scope." (Emphasis added is mine.) I wonder whether you or the plaintiff will point that part out.

        In other words, you would have needed to cash the check "knowing" that it would cause injury and that you did it to cause that injury. That's a high bar for willful and intentional! There's nothing else, really, in 523(a)(6). They must prove "willful AND intentional" which is pretty high. I'm not an attorney and can not advise you on this. I can say, that I would just keep repeating Geiger and 523(a)(6) requires the act to be both willful and intentional as in performed to cause injury. That means you would have to "know" that it would have caused injury and that calls for operation of the mind of a third party.

        I can't really add much more. If they are relying heavily on 523(a)(6), then you have to get them to die by it (as in Geiger). (By the way, do they reference Geiger the supreme court ruling, or are they just looking at the lower court!!!!!)
        Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
        Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
        Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog


        I am not an attorney. Any advice provided is not legal advice.

        Comment


        • My position is this: I cashed the check and used the money to pay another contractor, but wasn't intending on not paying the first one. I would have paid them if they had deducted the charges from their bill that I was requesting, since the second contractor did that work too (only correctly). I have a letter from my insurance company saying that the insurance wouldn't cover the work done by the second company because they already paid for that in the first check. The same letter also says that if I had issues with the first company's work, to take it up with them.

          They're quoting Geiger, Thiara, and some others. They're citing a local Arizona case saying that conversion can bar discharge, but I've got a 9th circuit case out of California saying that conversion does not constitute willful and malicious. Will that help, even though it's from a different state? I'm finalizing my half of the pretrial tonight.
          Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

          Comment


          • Based on what you're attacking, willful and intentional, that is what you do. You can use other 9th Circuit cases as persuasive, but I think Geiger is the more power Supreme Court case. If they can't prove either willful or intentional, then the debt is dischargeable (not protected by 523(a)(6)). It seems they are hanging their case on that, and so are you.

            My question about Geiger was whether they are citing the Supreme Court case of the lower court case! The Appellate overturned the lower bankruptcy court, BAP and District Court with the Supreme Court affirming the Appellate.
            Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
            Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
            Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog


            I am not an attorney. Any advice provided is not legal advice.

            Comment


            • Just sent you a pm. Another argument I'm using is that cashing the check may have led to the injury, but was not the injury itself. The action must be directly caused by the injury, not just a result of the action per Geiger.
              Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

              Comment


              • No, the action was not willful (period). The fact that the third party may have been injured is immaterial since you have to get to "willful AND intentional" first before you can get to whether the party was in fact injured. But, I do understnad how you're trying to build on Geiger! At least that's my theory, and I'm sticking to it.
                Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
                Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
                Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog


                I am not an attorney. Any advice provided is not legal advice.

                Comment


                • Here's a few they're citing.

                  Kawaauhau v Geiger, 523 US 57,61,118 S Ct 974, 140 LP ed 2d 90 (1998). In order for a debt to be nondischargeable, the injury must be willful such that the debtor must have intended the consequences of his action and not just the action itself.

                  Petralia v Jercich (in Re Jercich) 238 F3d 1202, 1208 (9th circuit 2001)
                  The willful injury requirement of section 523(a)(6) is met when it is shown either that the debtor had a subjective motive to inflict the injury or that the debtor believed that injury was substantially certain to occur as a result of his conduct.


                  In Re Jercich, supra: In addition, the injury must be malicious. This means that it must also be a wrongful act done intentionally which necessarily causes injury in which is done without just cause or excuse.
                  Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

                  Comment


                  • I think they are grasping. It must be willful AND malicious to be non-dischargeable (exact words from 523(a)(6)). That's the Geiger test and that is the precedence from the Supreme Court.

                    So it looks like they are hanging it on the willful and malicious clause. I can't really tell you how to fight it other than I would personally attack the willful and then malicious parts. I think it could go either way but that really depends on what testimony they have. That letter that you have, would probably be attacked as hearsay at trial unless authenticated by the agency that wrote the letter and has knowledge.

                    I'm sure the plaintiff is picking on you because you are pro se. You would have to attack their evidence (Fed Rules of Evidence) and show that they can't prove willful or malicious.
                    Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
                    Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
                    Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog


                    I am not an attorney. Any advice provided is not legal advice.

                    Comment


                    • Thank you! I'm going to sleep on it, garner a few more case citations, and type up the rest and send it tomorrow.
                      Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

                      Comment


                      • Oh, and the only testimony they claim to have is from reps of the company claiming that I signed the contract, and that I cashed the check. Nothing else, at least from the witnesses they listed.
                        Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by scbendel View Post
                          Oh, and the only testimony they claim to have is from reps of the company claiming that I signed the contract, and that I cashed the check. Nothing else, at least from the witnesses they listed.
                          You get to cross-examine the witnesses if they testify.
                          Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
                          Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
                          Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog


                          I am not an attorney. Any advice provided is not legal advice.

                          Comment


                          • Exactly. And I can't wait. I'm not calling any witnesses, as I don't really have anyone who can strengthen my case. I'm going to cross examine as necessary though. I just honestly want this to be over, win or lose. My life has been an absolute hell since the flood, living every day in constant anxiety and stressing about the outcome. I feel good about the outcome, but still can't shake that feeling.
                            Happily accepting help and advice from any and all helpers

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by justbroke View Post
                              You can use other 9th Circuit cases as persuasive
                              If the ruling is by the 9th circuit appellate panel, it is not just persuasive, it is binding precedence in Arizona which is part of the 9th Circuit.
                              Last edited by LadyInTheRed; 10-17-2013, 12:20 PM.
                              LadyInTheRed is in the black!
                              Filed Chap 13 April 2010. Discharged May 2015.
                              $143,000 in debt discharged for $36,500, including attorneys fees. Money well spent!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LadyInTheRed View Post
                                If the ruling is by the 9th circuit appellate panel, ir is not just persuasive, it is binding precedence in Arizona which is part of the 9th Circuit.
                                Need to be careful here. I have not researched the issue of conversion but bk courts may look to state law regarding property rights and claims. Also, BAP decisions are not "binding". The BAP is an advisory level court. However, all but one bk judge in AZ will automatically defer to BAP rulings. If the appellant elects to have the matter heard by the Federal District Court, District of Arizona (instead of the BAP) then the decision would be binding on the bk court in Arizona.

                                Edt. . . You can disregard the BAP comment if LITR's post was directed at the 9th Cir. Court of Appeals (not the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel), which clearly is binding.

                                Des.

                                Comment

                                Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X