Vig v. Erickson (In Re Erickson)

How courts have described this case

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

• declaring that section 523(a)(6) does not focus on the debtor's intent to inflict injury, but instead focuses on the intent to perform the act that gives rise to the injury
• following Ninth Circuit interpretation of § 523 which collapses “willful” and “malicious” elements into one standard, resembling interpretation rejected in In re Compos
• The focus is not on the intent to produce the injury but on the intent to perform the act which gives rise to the injury
• the focus is not on the intent to produce the injury, but on the intent to perform the act which gives rise to the injury
• debtor discontinued paying workers’ compensation insurance premiums prior to plaintiffs injury and withheld pay for medical expenses
• The failure to provide worker’s compensation insurance “necessarily” leads to the creditor’s position of being uninsured and is an intentional failure resulting in nondischargeability of the worker’s compensation debts under Section 523(a)(6)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).