Hansen v. Moore (In Re Hansen)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a creditor’s interest in a subsection 727(a) action, an action seeking denial of discharge, is similar but not identical to the interests of a trustee in such action and therefore the creditor cannot be bound by the trustee’s settlement of a subsection 727(a
• affirming bankruptcy court’s refusal to allow the debtor to use a “foxhole conversion” to absolve the debtor of fault when the debtor waited until after the meeting of creditors to amend the schedules
• affirming bankruptcy court's refusal to allow the debtor to use a \foxhole conversion\ to absolve the debtor of fault when the debtor waited until after the meeting of creditors to amend the schedules
• a debtor’s failure to offer a satisfactory explanation when called on by the court is a sufficient ground for denial of discharge
• “A party who fails to object to evidence at trial waives the right to raise admissibility issues on appeal.” (citing Price v. Kramer, 200 F.3d 1237, 1251-52 (9th Cir. 2000))
• “The sheer number of material inaccuracies contained in schedules that debtor, an attorney, admittedly reviewed and revised twice suffices as circumstantial evidence to support the finding that the ‘knowingly and fraudulently’ element of § 727(a)(4) was proven.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).