Cepelak v. Sears (In Re Sears)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the question of a debtor’s knowledge and intent under § 727(a)(4) is “a matter of fact”
• stating that the question of a debtor's knowledge and intent under § 727(a)(4) is “a matter of fact”
• noting size, value, and use of asset supports inference of knowledge
• “Since the granting of an exception to discharge under § 523(a) is subsumed within a denial of general discharge under § 727(a), the cross-appeal is mooted by our disposition of the Debtors’ appeal.”
• “Since the granting of an exception to discharge under § 523(a) is subsumed within a denial of general discharge under § 727(a), the cross-appeal is mooted by our disposition of the Debtors’ appeal.”
• both applying 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).