《楊清泉律師專欄》FALSE OATH BY OMISSION GROUND FOR DISMISSAL OF BANKRUPTCY(Part II)
楊清泉律師事務所
中文版
《楊清泉律師專欄》FALSE OATH BY OMISSION GROUND FOR DISMISSAL OF BANKRUPTCY (Part I)
Even if debtor did not intentionally undervalue his “Art” collection when he filed his petition, he did not appear to have a high regard for being truthful. At the meeting of creditors, he had a chance to correct his petition by testifying accurately about how many pieces of art he had and what the fair market values were. Since he owned and operated a gallery, he must have known the real fair market value of the items and he must have known how many pieces he had in his possession. The fact that he tried to sell an original painting for $4,700 right after he filed for bankruptcy indicates that he knew that he had grossly understated the value of his entire collection at $2,400. Further “nine or ten” pieces are a lot less than 16 pieces. It turned out that his entire collection was appraised at twelve times more than what he stated in his bankruptcy petition. He could have still corrected his testimony by amending his schedules after the 341-A meeting to show the correct quantity and values which he failed to do. Thus debtor showed a conscious omission which amounted to a material misrepresentation of fact.
《楊清泉律師專欄》FALSE OATH BY OMISSION GROUND FOR DISMISSAL OF BANKRUPTCY (Part I)
Even if debtor did not intentionally undervalue his “Art” collection when he filed his petition, he did not appear to have a high regard for being truthful. At the meeting of creditors, he had a chance to correct his petition by testifying accurately about how many pieces of art he had and what the fair market values were. Since he owned and operated a gallery, he must have known the real fair market value of the items and he must have known how many pieces he had in his possession. The fact that he tried to sell an original painting for $4,700 right after he filed for bankruptcy indicates that he knew that he had grossly understated the value of his entire collection at $2,400. Further “nine or ten” pieces are a lot less than 16 pieces. It turned out that his entire collection was appraised at twelve times more than what he stated in his bankruptcy petition. He could have still corrected his testimony by amending his schedules after the 341-A meeting to show the correct quantity and values which he failed to do. Thus debtor showed a conscious omission which amounted to a material misrepresentation of fact.
把此文章分享到：
關於 楊清泉律師事務所
