Legal Opinion
Link v. Mauz (In re Mauz)
United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided June 30, 2015No. CASE NO. 1:12-bk-06672-RNO; ADVERSARY NO. 1:13-ap-00053-RNOPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION1
Robert N. Opel, II, Bankruptcy Judge
Plaintiffs, William A. Link and Kimberly A. Link (collectively “Plaintiffs”), commenced the instant Adversary Proceeding *592against Joseph P. Mauz (“Debtor”). The Plaintiffs brought the present Adversary-Proceeding to determine the dischargeability of a debt allegedly caused by the intentional infliction of emotional distress. After trial, I conclude that the debt owed to the Plaintiffs is excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6).2
1. Jurisdiction
The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334. This is a core…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hoy v. AngeloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- William Barnes v. The American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Federal Communications Commission v. Nextwave Personal Communications Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2003
- 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
- Hughes v. BabcockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Burris v. Burris (In re Burris)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2019
- Joseph Mauz v.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017