Kieran Buckley v. David Bartenwerfer

facts claims and against him on his remaining claims and awarded him damages.

The Bartenwerfers filed for bankruptcy.

In the bankruptcy court, Buckley initiated an adversary proceeding against the

Bartenwerfers, arguing that the state court judgment against the Bartenwerfers could

not be discharged in bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), which provides

that a debtor cannot discharge debt that was obtained through fraud. The bankruptcy

court agreed and held that the portion of the state court judgment that was traceable

to Buckley’s nondisclosure claim was nondischargable. The bankruptcy court found

that the Bartenwerfers intended to deceive Buckley and held that Mr. Bartenwerfer

** The Honorable Paul C. Huck, United States District Judge for the U.S. District Court for Southern Florida, sitting by designation.

3 had actual knowledge of the false representations made to Buckley and that Mr.

Bartenwerfer’s fraudulent conduct could be imputed onto Mrs. Bartenwerfer

because of their partnership relationship. Additionally, the bankruptcy court

declined to apply collateral estoppel in favor of the Bartenwerfers based on the jury’s

findings of no intentional…