Gonzalez v. Moffitt (In Re Moffitt)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that finding of “extreme and outrageous” conduct under Ohio law for intentional infliction of serious emotional distress established, “at a minimum,” that the debtor acted in “conscious disregard” of his duties to the plaintiff
• stating that the Eighth and Fifth Circuits and the Ninth Circuit BAP have embraced the “substantially certain” standard
• recognizing pre-Semtek that whether federal or state law collateral estoppel principles were applied did not affect outcome
• applying collateral estoppel given extensive language in state court judgment and extenuating procedural facts
• applying collateral estoppel given extensive language in state court judgment and extenuating procedural facts
• \[A] person is deemed to have acted maliciously when that person acts in conscious disregard of his duties or without just cause or excuse.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).