Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
12 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE PETER CARROLL
13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
14 APPEARANCES:
24
Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording;
25 transcript produced by transcription service.
ii
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
20 Rule 7052.
17 liability.
18 Tennessee, 1983:
19 "Holding that a shareholder,
20 officer and director of a corporation
21 who fraudulently induces a loan to a
22 wholly-owned corporation obtains a
23 benefit under Section 523(a)(2)."
24 Whether or not the Defendant indirectly obtains
25 money or property from a plaintiff, it is the plaintiff's
4 fraud.
23 540 (9th Cir. 1989). The failure to plead fraud with the
24 requisite particularity is grounds in itself to dismiss a
15 Medical Care, Incorporated, was not some form of HB, but that
5 and knew that his agreement was with HB, not with the
6 Defendant individually.
13 reimbursement account.
14 HB would prepare and forward to Plaintiff a weekly
15 reimbursement report, reflecting the amount of checks to
20 Plaintiff.
25 reimbursement account."
15 separate corporation.
21 Defendant did not tell him that the account would be owned by
23 Alta Vista.
10
5 course of action.
20 effect.
11
23 Defendant.
12
4 certificates and filed tax returns for 2001 through 2005, but
13
1 with HB in 2007.
6 accounts, and then would check the amount that was actually
11 bank accounts.
22 to him.
14
23 time exactly how much Plaintiff had been overpaid under the
24 agreement.
15
18 those records.
19 Plaintiff testified that Defendant "never
20 mentioned again the matter to me until I pursued my claim
22 checks.
16
1 with the bank, and that he had agreed to give HB some time to
7 three months.
15 accept checks for payment under his agreement with HB, post-
21 could be refunded.
17
25 which she stated -- and I'm reading from page 297, line seven
18
19
18 overpayment issue.
19 Defendant testified that Plaintiff knew of the
20 overpayment problem, but stalled her and did not want to deal
20
18 2007.
19 To the extent Plaintiff claims that he relied on
20 statements allegedly made by Defendant concerning the reasons
21 for the delay in payment, and the need for post-dated checks
21
22
12 the complaint.
23 $3,000,000.
23
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25