Skip to main content

§ 523(a)(3)(B)

Scannapieco, In re

Ruling
Leave to file late nondischargeability proceeding denied as creditor did not act withreasonable diligence. (Bankr. E.D.N.Y.)
Issue(s)
Exceptions to Discharge; Types of Debt Excepted; Debts Not Duly Listed or

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Scannapieco, In re Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 27, 2022 , LexisNexis #0822-089

Daniels, In re--Daniels v. Howe Law Firm, P.C.

Ruling
Debtor's motion for reconsideration denied where law firm's failure to seek determination ofthe nondischargeability of debt was not a bar to debtor's raising the discharge injunction asdefense. (Bankr. N.D. Ga.)
Issue(s)
Exceptions to Discharge; Types of Debt Excepted; Debts Not Duly Listed or

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Daniels, In re--Daniels v. Howe Law Firm, P.C. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 28, 2019 , LexisNexis #0619-011

Hrobuchak, In re--Transcontinental Refrigerated Lines, Inc. v. Hrobuchak

Ruling
Unscheduled debt was dischargeable as the creditor had been made aware of the chapter 7 adjudication when he spoke to the debtor's chapter 7 trustee. (Bankr. M.D. Pa.)
Issue(s)
Exceptions to Discharge; Types of Debt Excepted; Debts Not Duly Listed or Scheduled; Preventing Timely Filing of Proof of Claim or Determination of Dischargeability.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Hrobuchak, In re--Transcontinental Refrigerated Lines, Inc. v. Hrobuchak Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on July 30, 2018 , LexisNexis #0918-047

Dos Santos, In re--Jefferson Cty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Dos Santos

Ruling
Adversary proceeding dismissed where creditor waited a year and a half to bring the dischargeability complaint and the delay was unreasonable, unexplained, and prejudicial to the debtor. (Bankr. D. Colo.)
Issue(s)
Exceptions to Discharge; Types of Debt Excepted; Debts Not Duly Listed or Scheduled; Preventing Timely Filing of Proof of Claim or Determination of Dischargeability.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Dos Santos, In re--Jefferson Cty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Dos Santos Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 31, 2018 , LexisNexis #0718-038

Stambaugh v. Stambaugh (In re Stambaugh)

Ruling
Proceeding for exception from discharge under § 523(a)(3) dismissed for failure to state a claim where creditor had not stated a plausible claim under § 523(a)(2), (4), or (6).
Issue(s)
Did creditor sufficiently establish grounds for nondischargeability under § 523(a)(2), (4), or (6) to be entitled to a discharge of unlisted intentional tort debt under § 523(a)(3)?

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Stambaugh v. Stambaugh (In re Stambaugh) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 14, 2015 , LexisNexis #0615-053

In re Dalezios

Ruling
Debtor could not reopen case to list additional creditors where failure to list was not innocent and was prejudicial.
Issue(s)
Could debtor reopen no-asset case to list additional creditors?

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Dalezios Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 07, 2014 , LexisNexis #0614-055

Muir v. McWilliams (In re Muir)

Ruling
Creditor who did not receive notice of case could pursue nondischargeability issue in state court.
Issue(s)
Could creditors inadvertently omitted from debtors' schedules have a right to pursue issue of nondischargeability in state court.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Muir v. McWilliams (In re Muir) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on August 16, 2013 , LexisNexis #0913-043

Hathorn v. Petty (In re Petty)

Ruling
Nondischargeability proceeding should not have been dismissed where creditor had insufficient notice to timely file complaint.
Procedural posture

Creditors sought review of an order from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Arkansas, which granted appellee Chapter 7 debtor's motion to dismiss their complaint seeking a determination of nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(3)(B) and (a)(6) as untimely under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Hathorn v. Petty (In re Petty) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 08, 2013 , LexisNexis #0513-121

In re Barnes

Ruling
Debtor allowed to reopen case to allow for adversary proceeding to determine if debts of omitted creditors were or were not nondischargeable.
Procedural posture

Debtor filed a chapter 7 bankruptcy case. The chapter 7 trustee filed a report of no distribution. The trustee's report was approved without objection. The debtor filed an ex parte motion to reopen her chapter 7 case for the purpose of amending the schedules in order to list previously omitted creditors.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Barnes Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 21, 2013 , LexisNexis #0713-048

In re Manning

Ruling
State court had jurisdiction to determine nondischargeability of unscheduled claims after discharge in no-asset case.
Procedural posture

Debtor wife sought an order requiring defendant creditors to show cause why they should not be held in contempt for violating the discharge injunction in 11 U.S.C.S. § 524 on account of their filing of a complaint (Suit) against debtors in state court. Issues included whether debtor's alleged debt to defendants had been discharged in the chapter 7 case and whether the state court enjoyed concurrent jurisdiction per 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(3)(B).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Manning Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on June 19, 2012 , LexisNexis #0712-050