Ojeda v. Goldberg

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 “fraudulently induced forbearance does constitute an extension or renewal” of credit
• explaining that “[j]ustifiable reliance is a less demanding standard than reasonable reliance”
• “As the Supreme Court held in Field, creditors have no duty to investigate if they are unaware of a potential falsity.”
• “When re- viewing a question that had its origination in a bankruptcy court, as opposed to in a district court, our review focuses on the bankruptcy court's actions.”
• “We think it is abundantly clear that a fraudulently induced forbearance fits squarely within these definitions [of ‘extension’ or ‘renewal’], and note that other circuits have reached the same conclusion”
• debtor must make a false representation or omission “that the debtor (a) knew was false or made with reckless disregard for the truth and (b) was made with the intent to deceive”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).