Krommenhoek v. Covino (In Re Covino)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant could not offer on reconsideration a statement to “more thoroughly vet this issue and present what they believe might be more compelling testimony or the alleged contract of sale” as evidence not “newly discovered”
• denying motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9011 where it was coupled with another motion
• “the evidence discovered must be of a nature that would probably change the outcome of the case”
• court ordered discharge revocation and judgment for value of misappropriated assets

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).