Legal Opinion

Hamerly v. Salupo (In Re Salupo)

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided May 5, 2008No. 05-42560PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER

RANDOLPH BAXTER, Bankruptcy Judge.

In a ten-count complaint (“Complaint”), co-plaintiffs Paul and Nancy Hamerly (“Hamerlys”) seek to have a home construction related debt determined to be nondischargeable under §§ 523(a)(2), (4) and (6) of the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2), (Ip) and (6). Co-debtors/co-defendants, Gerald and Roseann Salupo (“Debtors”) formally responded with a general denial to the Complaint’s allegations. Upon a duly noticed trial proceeding, an examination of the evidence adduced, and a review of the record, generally, the following…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Kawaauhau v. GeigerSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. Field v. MansSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. In Re: Seymour Markowitz, Debtor. Seymour Markowitz v. Carolyn CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  5. Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners' Ass'n v. R.E. Roark Companies, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Doe v. Boland (In re Boland)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2019
  2. In re BolandBankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API