Legal Opinion

State v. Joseph Diorio (069597)

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 12, 2014No. A-110-11PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judge CUFF

(temporarily assigned) delivered the opinion of the Court.

In 1999, Joseph Diorio and two others conceived and executed a “bust-out” financial scheme by creating a business for the purpose of defrauding creditors. In a bust-out scheme, a company is formed and establishes a credit line presenting itself to the business community as a reputable company. Initially, it places small orders with suppliers. As it establishes a favorable payment history, the company’s credit limit is increased. Once the company’s suppliers are satisfied that the company has established a reputation for…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Toussie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. State v. WeleckSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
  3. State v. CooperSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
  4. United States v. Alberto ParamoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  5. United States v. ConleyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State of Iowa v. Eddie TiptonSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
  2. State v. TwiggsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2018
  3. State of New Jersey v. James E. Jones and LikishaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2016
  4. State v. BernardiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2018
  5. STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. GREGORY P. COBBS (13-07-0893, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2017

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

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

Powered by the Exa API