Legal Opinion
Liccio v. Topakas (In Re Topakas)
United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided November 20, 1996No. 19-10724PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVID A. SCHOLL, Chief Judge.
A INTRODUCTION
The instant adversary proceeding (“the Proceeding”) requires this court to determine whether the unliquidated claims of waitress ROSE MARY LICCIO (“the Plaintiff’) of sexual harassment against her employer, restaurant co-owner JOHN E. TOPAKAS (“the Debtor”), are non-disehargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The conduct at issue is several allegedly sexually-oriented touchings combined with sexually-related utter-ings. The principal defenses are that the conduct never happened or has been exaggerated in a contrived boilerplate federal…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Andrews v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- City of Los Angeles Department of Water v. ManhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Johnson v. Fors (In Re Fors)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
- Hamilton v. Nolan (In Re Nolan)District Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Biggers v. Wilson (In Re Wilson)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1997
- Taylor v. Fechnay (In Re Fechnay)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
- Ammons v. Edwards (In Re Edwards)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.