Legal Opinion

TIA Corp. v. Bridges (In re Bridges)

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan

Decided March 24, 2018No. Case No. DK 17–04455; Adversary Pro. No. 17–80195PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The court understands the Plaintiff's reluctance to rely solely on § 523(b) without filing a second action because, in the present case, § 523(b) as interpreted by United States Supreme Court, does not expressly provide an automatic exception to the discharge that may be entered in the current case. See Young v. United States , 535 U.S. 43, 122 S.Ct. 1036, 152 L.Ed.2d 79 (2002). The reason is simple: the Defendant did not get a discharge in his chapter 13 case. See Notice of Chapter 13 Case Closed Without Discharge (ECF No. 59 in MIWB Case No. 17-00719). As the Supreme Court explained:

*699The…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Young v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Moncur v. Agricredit Acceptance Co. (In Re Moncur)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2005

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Capitol Indemnity Corporation v. Tria Lalani Sparks, f/k/a Tria HuntUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · 2023
  2. Capitol Indemnity Corporation v. Tria Lalani Sparks, f/k/a Tria HuntUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API