Guerra v. Fernandez-Rocha (In Re Fernandez-Rocha)

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the statute did not “require a doctor to place funds ‘in trust’ for the benefit of third party patients”
• explaining that the exception for fraud while acting in a fiduciary capacity is narrow
• finding that the debtor was not acting in a fiduciary capacity where statute did not “require a doctor to place funds ‘in trust’ for the benefit of third party pa- tients”
• determining that a Florida statute requiring doctors to maintain funds to satisfy malpractice debts did not create a fiduciary relationship or technical trust between the debtor and his patient for purposes of § 523(a)(4)
• explaining that debtor-defendant was not a fiduciary, in relevant part, because Florida law did not require the debtor to hold and control the plaintiff’s funds, nor gave the plaintiff any property interest in funds already held and controlled by the debtor
• “Constructive or resulting trusts, which generally serve as a remedy for some dereliction of duty in a confidential relationship, do not fall within the § 523(a)(4) exception because the act which created the debt simultaneously created the trust relationship.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).