Casey v. Grasso (In Re Riccitelli)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that malpractice claim that accrued postpetition was not ‘‘sufficiently rooted in the pre-bankruptcy past’’ because harm suffered occurred postpetition and was entangled with debtor’s ability to have unencumbered fresh start
• applying Segal approach and concluding that malpractice claim alleging loss of homestead exemption was not property of estate
• analyzing whether attorney’s prepetition legal advice was an asset of the bankruptcy estate
• “Only postpetition could [the debtor] have claimed the homestead exemption in bankruptcy.... Only postpetition did he suffer ... the loss of what would otherwise have been his protected equity.”
• “This motion (as opposed to the adversary proceeding as a whole

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).