Applegate v. Shuler (In Re Shuler)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining embezzlement under § 523(a)(4) requires an intent to deprive and whether the debtor acted with such intent is a question of fact
• reasoned that for purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4), the definition of embezzlement was the same
• “The fact that the intent is to deprive the rightful owner of the funds only temporarily and not permanently ... does not eliminate the element of intent.”
• debtor’s use of proceeds of sale of consigned property constituted embezzlement
• “The fact that the intent is to deprive the rightful owner of the funds only temporarily and not permanently, as is often the situation in cases such as [this] ... does not eliminate the element of intent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).