In re Cromer Farms, Inc. (99-10321)

In this chapter 12 case, the court ruled that the creditor did not carry its burden of proof to establish nondischargeability under ยง 523(a)(2)(A), (4), or (6) of the Code. The court also ruled that language in a consent order, which allowed Debtor's late-filed answer to the counterclaim, did not entitle the creditor to a default judgment, and that collateral estoppel did not apply to bar Debtor from contesting the nondischargeability complaint.

Tuesday, July 18, 2000