First Weber Group, Incorporate v. Jonathan Horsfall

How courts have described this case

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

• holding state court tortious interference with contract verdict under Wisconsin law collaterally estopped debtor from challenging some elements of nondischargeability under section 523(a)(6)
• noting that the state court judgment at issue in that case “precluded relitigation of the issue of maliciousness” because the state court’s “inquiry substantially mirrored the federal test for maliciousness.”
• explaining that a plaintiff can establish \willfulness\ by showing that the \debtor's motive was to inflict the injury[ ] or the debtor's act was substantially certain to result in injury\ (internal quotation omitted)
• explaining that a plaintiff can establish “willfulness” by showing that the “debtor’s motive was to inflict the injury ... or the debtor’s act was substantially certain to result in injury” (internal quotation omitted)
• explaining that a plaintiff can establish “willfulness” by showing that the “debtor’s motive was to inflict the injury ... or the debtor’s act was substantially certain to result in injury” (internal quotation omitted)
• finding injury to mean “a violation of another’s legal right, for which the law provides a remedy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).