Douglas v. Kosinski (Kosinski)

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[t]he normal commercial meaning and usage of 'statement’ in connection with ‘financial condition’ denote either a representation of an entity’s overall net worth or an entity's overall ability to generate income”
• concluding narrow view is limited to “statement’s providing information as to a debtor [or insider’s] net worth, overall financial health, or an equation of assets and liabilities”
• citing, among others, Lentz v. Spadoni (In re Spadoni), 316 F.3d 56, 58 (1st Cir.2003); Palmacci v. Umpierrez, 121 F.3d 781, 785 (1st Cir.1997)
• explaining “a finding is cleaiiy erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the Panel is left with the definite impression that a mistake has been made”
• under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B), a creditor must prove all five elements
• collecting cases within the First Circuit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).