Legal Opinion

Dave v. Baessler (In re Baessler)

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas

Decided July 19, 2018No. CASE NO. 11-10670-TMD; ADV. NO. 11-01188-TMDPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

TONY M. DAVIS, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE

Three years ago, a California state court found that Baessler, acting with the intent to deceive, made false representations that Dave reasonably relied on to his detriment. Based on that finding, the state court entered judgment on several legal theories, including one theory that did not require proof of an intent to deceive. Does the state court's finding bind the bankruptcy court in a subsequent suit to determine whether the judgment can be discharged?

I. Facts

A. A house in Beverly Hills.

In the fall of 2006, Dave hired Baessler to remodel Dave's…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Local Loan Co. v. HuntSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  5. Field v. MansSupreme Court of the United States · 1995

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Trans Global Auto Logistics, Inc. v. DavidsonUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Texas · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API