Crews v. Topping (In Re Topping)

How courts have described this case

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

• where assets of substantial 13 value were omitted from debtor’s schedules, conclusion was warranted that 14 omission was purposeful, with fraudulent intent to conceal assets

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).