Patton v. Hooper (In Re Hooper)

How courts have described this case

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

• continuing concealment is sufficient to bring the transfer within the statutory period
• bare proof that debtor continued to live in house transferred to grown son without any other evidence of retention of beneficial interest did not bring transfer within the statutory one-year period
• bare proof that debtors continued to live in transferred property is not continuing concealment
• held that error in valuing gold ring did not warrant denial of discharge
• “The Court holds that the bare proof of debtors continuing to live on the property that they transferred ... without more, is insufficient to constitute a ‘continuing concealment’ to bring the transfer within the one year period specified in § 727(a)(2)(A).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).