Document Type
Brief
Publication Date
3-29-2018
Abstract
This brief is concerned with the Petitioner’s misinterpretation of §523(a)(2) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §101, et seq., which wrongly maintains that a false oral statement describing a single asset gives rise to a non-dischargeable debt. This brief shows Congress understood that §523(a)(2) simply re-enacted statutory language already having a completely settled understanding that a statement about a single asset was a “statement respecting financial condition” which must be in writing in order to give rise to a nondischargeable debt. This brief also submits that even if, arguendo, Petitioner were correct that a statement respecting financial condition must refer to overall financial condition, Respondent gave statements about his overall financial condition because they amounted to a claim that he was solvent in the equity sense; i.e., able to pay his debts.
Publisher
United States Supreme Court
City
Washington D.C.
Volume
Case 138 S.Ct. 1752
Issue
Docket Number 16-1215
First Page
1
Last Page
42
Recommended Citation
Laura Spitz,
Brief for Professors, Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. R. Scott Appling as Amicus Curiae,
Case 138 S.Ct. 1752
1
(2018).
Available at:
https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_facultyscholarship/780
Comments
Brief of Amici Curiae Law Professors Richard Aaron, Laura Bartell, Jagdeep S. Bhandari, Susan Block-Lieb, Vincent Buccola, Jessica Gabel Cino, Linda Coco, Laura Napoli Coordes, Robert D’agostino, Irina Fox, Bruce Grohsgal, George Kuney, Lois Lupica, Nancy B. Rapoport, Keith Sharfman, Michael Sousa, Laura M. Spitz, and Adrian Walters
Counsel: Richard Lieb & John Collen