Knox v. Sunstar Acceptance Corp. (In Re Knox)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that because “the claim under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act seek[s] remedies for violations of the Bankruptcy Code for which the Code itself and Rules provide other remedies, ... [the claim is] preempted by the Bankruptcy Code”
• applying four-part Cort test to determine there is no implied private right of action under § 105
• “Without the Bankruptcy Code’s requirement that [the defendant] SAC submit proofs of claim ... Knox would have no factual basis on which to bring an action for deceptive conduct under the Illinois consumer fraud statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).