Morgan Packing Co. v. McCrate

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 debtor is not required to “bring her claims in the court that issued the original discharge order”
• holding discharge injunction under § 524 is enforceable by way of § 105, without addressing availability of implied right of action directly under § 524
• holding that “when dealing, as here, with violation of a purely statutory order,” such as the discharge injunction imposed by Section 524, it is not necessary to return to “the court that issued the original discharge order”
• holding a state law unjust enrichment claim against a creditor preempted by the Bankruptcy Code
• observing that bankruptcy courts “have appropriately used their statutory contempt power to order monetary relief . . . when creditors have engaged in conduct that violates” the discharge injunction
• enforcing the discharge injunction does not call for consideration of the judge’s “insights and thought processes” as would be pertinent to enforcing a custom-made injunction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).