切換簡體 商家登錄

《楊清泉律師專欄》IS PRINCIPAL LIABLE FOR AGENT’S FRAUD IN BANKRUPTCY?

楊清泉律師事務所

【接上文】

Huh filed for Chapter 7 relief. Sachan filed a complaint objecting to discharge of his claim under Section 523(a)(2)(A). The bankruptcy court in the Central District of California, after trial, ruled in Huh’s favor, finding that Kim was Huh’s agent but declining to impute Kim’s fraud to Huh. The bankruptcy court found that Huh never communicated with Sachan or Sachan’s company regarding the market’s purchase; Huh made no misrepresentations to Sachan or Sachan’s company; Kim made no misrepresentations to Sachan on Huh’s behalf; prior to the sale, Huh was not aware of the market and so knew of no defects of, or, if the market was generating profits; and Huh was not aware of the purchase of the market by Sachan until after the sale closed. Sachan appealed. The 9th circuit found that “more than a principal/agent relationship is required to establish a fraud exception to discharge….the creditor must show that the debtor knew, or should have known, of the agent’s fraud.”

This week, 2014 years ago, Jesus Christ the One and only Son of the One true God, willingly suffered torture and death on the cross, to redeem mankind from the consequences of sin because He loves us so.

Lawrence Bautista Yang is a graduate of Georgetown University Law Center and has been in law practice for thirty years. He specializes in bankruptcy, business and civil litigation and has handled more than five thousand successful bankruptcy cases in California. He speaks Mandarin and Fujien and looks forward to discussing your case with you personally. Please call (626) 284-1142 for an appointment at 1000 S Fremont Ave, Mailstop 58, Bldg A-1 Suite 1125, Alhambra, CA 91803.

把此文章分享到:

關於 楊清泉律師事務所