Not really
by ratinatux (2024-03-18 18:56:30)
Edited on 2024-03-18 19:22:42

In reply to: Wasn't that what was determined in Bartenwerfer v Buckley?  posted by dulac89

Cannot Reply Return to Political

Actually that case was about a debtor’s debt for money that was procured by fraud not of the debtor but of a non-debtor third party, but for which the third larty was liable. There seems at least an analytical difference between a debt procured by fraud and a debt for a penalty owed to the government for having committed the fraud. But in any event — that does not tackle the automatic stay issue at all, and whether there could be a collection despite a pending bankruptcy

Replies: