Legal Opinion
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Pugliese (In Re Pugliese)
United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 15, 1997No. Bankruptcy No. 5-95-01582, Adversary No. 5-95-00572APublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER 1
JOHN J. THOMAS, Bankruptcy Judge.
On December 29, 1995, Sears, Roebuck & Company, the Plaintiff, filed a Complaint to designate certain debts incurred by James F. Pugliese, the Debtor, as nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). A trial regarding the dischargeability of the debt owed to Sears, Roebuck & Company was conducted on August 27,1996. After reviewing the pleadings and the transcripts, the facts of this case are as follows.
On two occasions, the Debtor executed credit applications with the Plaintiff, who in turn extended credit to the Debtor in the form of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Davis v. Aetna Acceptance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- In Re Dominick P. CONTE, Debtor, Dominick P. CONTE, Appellant v. Urmila GAUTAM; Narinder Gautam; U.S. Trustee, TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Littlefield v. McGuffey (In Re McGuffey)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1992
- ITT Consumer Discount Co. v. Horldt (In Re Horldt)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Homschek (In Re Homschek)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
- Mega Enterprises, Inc. v. Lahiri (In Re Lahiri)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998