Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 1 of 23
In re:
CLINTON PORTIS,
Debtor.
/
MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, LLC, d/b/a BORGATA HOTEL
CASINO & SPA,
Adv. Case No.: ____________
Plaintiff,
v.
CLINTON PORTIS,
Defendant.
/
COMPLAINT TO DETERMINE DISCHARGEABILITY OF DEBT
Plaintiff, Marina District Development Company, LLC d/b/a Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa
(Borgata or the Plaintiff), by and through the undersigned counsel, files this Complaint to
Determine Dischargeability of Debt against the Debtor and Defendant herein, Clinton Portis
(Debtor or Defendant), and states as follows:
PROCEDURAL ALLEGATIONS
1.
case bearing United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Florida, Gainesville Division,
Case No. 15-10274-KKS.
2.
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 2 of 23
3.
4.
petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville
Division. See Bankr. Case No. 15-10274; Doc. 1.
6.
7.
known as Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa in Atlantic City, New Jersey.
8.
Borgata is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a holder of a casino license issued
by the New Jersey Control Commission which authorized it to operate a casino hotel in
accordance with the Casino Control Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
9.
Application) to the Borgata. In his Application, Plaintiff made representations to the effect
that he had no financial problems or debt. These representations were reasonably relied upon by
Borgata, which then approved and a line of credit in favor of Defendant.
10.
As set forth in the annexed Exhibit A, through his line of credit at Borgata,
Defendant executed numerous checks to Borgata, six (6) of which were presented to the bank
and returned on the dates set forth therein. A copy of the front and back of these checks have
been annexed hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B.
Case 16-01001-KKS
12.
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 3 of 23
Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) (Borgatas claim) based upon six returned
(6) counter checks (Bad Checks) executed and delivered by the Defendant.
13.
These Bad Checks were drawn on the account Defendant provided to Borgata for
the purposes of their issuance and redemption, specifically the account held by Defendant at
Bank of America, Annandale, VA, account number 435017532194 (the Bank).
14.
These Bad Checks were submitted for deposit, consistent with the applicable
provisions of the New Jersey Casino Control Act, and the applicable regulations relating thereto.
15.
Upon information and belief, at the time Defendant endorsed the Bad Checks, he
knew that the Bad Checks would not be honored by the Bank as the account balance had already
been depleted and/or Defendant had planned to deplete the account prior to the time within
which the Bad Checks would have been redeemed by Borgata.
16.
immediate left of the signature, a statement which says the following: I represent that I have
received cash and that said amount is available or on deposit in said bank or trust company
in my name. It is free from claims and is subject to this check. If dishonored interest will
be added at 12% per annum
17.
Borgata reasonably relied upon this representations made by the Defendant that
funds equal to the amount of the Bad Checks would be available for Borgata, said funds totaling
One Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00).
18.
Borgata that there would be sufficient funds in his account. Reasonably relying upon such
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 4 of 23
When the Bad Checks were not repaid and redeemed at the casino during the
redemption period, Borgata deposited the checks in question in accordance with its obligations
under the Casino Control Act.
20.
check numbers 1154146, 1154150, 1154151, 1154157, 1154158, 1154182 were returned to
Borgata as NSF, meaning Not Sufficient Funds.
21.
Various demands were made upon Defendant for the repayment of the One
Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) in returned Bad Checks.To date, however,
Defendant has made only six payments of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) each for a total of
thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) Dollars toward the amount owed.
22.
Consequently, there remains a balance due and owing of One Hundred and
COUNT I
(Non-Dischargeability Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A))
The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 22 are restated in their entirety.
23.
Bankruptcy Code including, but not limited to, 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A), which provides that:
A discharge under . . . this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt for
money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent
obtained byfalse pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud . . .
Case 16-01001-KKS
24.
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 5 of 23
Defendant, Borgata asserts that its unsecured claim is non-dischargeable against Defendant in an
amount of One Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00).
25.
The Defendant incurred the debt in question through the use of written statements
which were knowingly materially false and upon which Borgata reasonably relied in connection
with the redemption of the markers in question, providing Defendant with One Hundred Seventy
Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) in cash or gaming chips.
26.
The Debtors issuance of a Bad Check is a false pretense because such checks are
made under the express and implied representation that it will be honored.
27.
Borgata suffered losses in the amount of One Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars
The debt owed by Defendant to Borgata remains outstanding and, for the reasons
set forth above, is a non-dischargeable debt pursuant to the provisions of 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2).
WHEREFORE, Borgata demands the entry of Judgment declaring that the One Hundred
Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) debt in question owed by Defendant to Borgata to be
non-dischargeable and, further, awarding Borgata interest, reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
COUNT II
(Non-Dischargeability Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(B))
The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 22 are restated in their entirety.
29.
Section 523(a)(2)(B) provides that: A discharge under . . . this title does not
Case 16-01001-KKS
30.
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 6 of 23
As a result of the Debtors materially false representations, Borgata asserts that its
On January 18, 2011, Defendant submitted the Application (to the Borgata. In the
Application, Plaintiff made representations to the effect that he had no financial problems or
debt. These representations were reasonably relied upon by Borgata, which then approved and a
line of credit in favor of Defendant.
32.
The Debtors line of credit was extended several times based on representations
Based on information and belief, the Debtor knew such representations were
materially false at the time they were made and made such representations to induce Borgata to
extend credit to him.
WHEREFORE, Borgata demands the entry of Judgment declaring that the One Hundred
Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) debt in question owed by Defendant to Borgata to be
non-dischargeable and, further, awarding Borgata interest, reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
COUNT III
(Non-Dischargeability Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6))
The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 21 are restated in their entirety.
34.
Application, Plaintiff made representations to the effect that he had no financial problems or
debt. These representations were reasonably relied upon by Borgata, which then approved and a
line of credit in favor of Defendant.
35.
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 7 of 23
initial issuance of the line of credit and subsequent increases were based on material
misrepresentations that Defendant knew were false at the time he filled out the Application.
36.
false, the Borgata incurred a One Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($170,000.00) debt that
remains outstanding and is a non-dischargeable debt pursuant to the provisions of 11 U.S.C.
523(a)(6).
37.
Based on information and belief, the Debtor knew such representations were
materially false at the time they were made and made such representations to induce Borgata to
extend credit to him.
38.
Upon information and belief, the Debtor knew his available funds to pay the Bad
The use of Bad Checks by the Debtor when the Debtor knew such checks were
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 8 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 9 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 10 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 11 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 12 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 13 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 14 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 15 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 16 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 17 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 18 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 19 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 20 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 21 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 22 of 23
Case 16-01001-KKS
Doc 1
Filed 02/01/16
Page 23 of 23