Narrative Opinion Summary
Fraudulently inducing a creditor to extend the repayment due date of a loan constitutes sufficient grounds for a claim of nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2) in bankruptcy proceedings. It is not required for the creditor to demonstrate that "new money" was lent to the debtor to support this claim. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirms the ruling of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel in *In re Kim, 163 B.R. 157 (9th Cir. BAP 1994)*, which establishes this legal principle. The case was submitted without oral argument, and the ruling was unanimous.
Legal Issues Addressed
Nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court ruled that fraudulently inducing a creditor to extend the repayment due date of a loan is sufficient grounds for claiming nondischargeability in bankruptcy proceedings.
Reasoning: Fraudulently inducing a creditor to extend the repayment due date of a loan constitutes sufficient grounds for a claim of nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2) in bankruptcy proceedings.
Precedential Value of Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Ninth Circuit affirmed the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's decision, thereby reinforcing its precedential value regarding nondischargeability under the specified code.
Reasoning: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirms the ruling of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel in *In re Kim, 163 B.R. 157 (9th Cir. BAP 1994)*, which establishes this legal principle.
Requirement of 'New Money' in Nondischargeability Claimssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that it is not necessary for the creditor to demonstrate that 'new money' was lent to the debtor to support a claim of nondischargeability under this section.
Reasoning: It is not required for the creditor to demonstrate that 'new money' was lent to the debtor to support this claim.