Remove California Remove Malfeasance Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Justices narrow bankruptcy relief from debts incurred by fraud

SCOTUSBlog

The statute, though, contains several exceptions to the discharge, generally describing debts that Congress regarded as so important or reflecting such objectionable behavior that it is inappropriate for the debtor to discharge them. For Barrett, the case begins and ends with the language of the statute.

Statute 111
article thumbnail

A bungled house sale, a bankrupt couple, and a statutory puzzle involving debts incurred through fraud

SCOTUSBlog

Dissatisfied with the purchase, Buckley eventually obtained a judgment in a California state court based on the failure of the Bartenwerfers to disclose information about the house on the standard-form Transfer Disclosure Statement. The statute refers to the discharge of “any” debt obtained by “fraud.”

Statute 98
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

‘Invisibility’ of Prosecutor Misconduct Erodes Trust: PA Report

The Crime Report

In July 2020, California changed its rules of professional responsibility to require judges to take action upon a judicial finding of misconduct, even without reference to the Professional Rules of Conduct. Require Automatic Reporting of Misconduct. Make Prosecutors Liable to Criminal Charges. Establish an Oversight Commission.

article thumbnail

TURKEY TORTS (2020)

JonathanTurley

In 2020, the cancelation of parades and the reduction of travel has led to a very different legal profile of holiday mishaps and malfeasance. Already over 40 people have fallen ill from the lettuce linked to Salinas, California. The litigation over last year’s lettuce recall has only just started due to the statute of limitations.

Tort 38
article thumbnail

Injunction Junction And Circuit Splits Too

Above The Law

Plaintiffs, including transgender minors and advocacy organizations, argued that the orders violated the separation of powers, conflicted with existing statutes, and infringed on equal protection rights. 1211(b), which allows the President to remove the Special Counsel only for specific reasons (inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance).

Court 74