In Re Chomakos

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 “legally enforceable” right to future payment constitutes value received by a debtor under the “reasonably equivalent value” analysis
• explaining that “the contractual right to receive payment in the event that [the bet] turns out well” has economic value
• evaluating the quid pro quo and concluding values exchanged at a casino were reasonably equivalent despite the house advantage
• declining to evaluate transactions solely from creditors’ perspective in cases involving non-tangible or consumable goods and services, such as gambling and dining expenditures
• because legalized gambling provides fair chance for significant pay-off, $7,710 in gambling losses conferred value on debtor
• the chance of winning a bet placed at a casino constituted value at the time the bet was placed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).