Davis v. Aetna Acceptance Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the obli gation arising from the debtor’s conversion of collateral was dischargeable absent “aggravated features”
• holding that because the plaintiff knowingly and willingly loaned the funds to the debtor, he did not acquire the funds without her permission
• holding that a mortgagor in possession is not a fiduciary of the mortgagee within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act, even though the mortgagor has obligated himself to keep the security intact
• holding that an “obligation is not turned into one arising from a trust because the parties to one of the documents has chosen to speak of it as a trust”
• stating that the scope of the discharge exception is to be limited to technical trusts, not implied or constructive trusts
• noting that the debtor “must have been a trustee before the wrong and without reference thereto.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Davis v. Aetna Acceptance Co.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Davis v. Aetna Acceptance Co.
  Supreme Court· 1934-10-08