Roussos

Roussos v. Michaelides

Good Law
33 F. App'x 365
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 2002No. 00-56348; BAP No. CC-99-01351-MaMeBCalifornia447 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Harry Roussos and Theodosios Roussos (“the Roussoses”), Chapter 7 debtors, appeal the bankruptcy court’s summary judgment in an 11 U.S.C. § 523 adversary proceeding determining a state court judgment in favor of Lula Michaelides (“Michaelides”) to be nondischargeable. We affirm.

Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we need not repeat them here.

I. COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL

The Roussoses contend that the bankruptcy court erred in applying collateral estoppel on the basis of the state court judgment. They concede that the substantive elements of § 523(a)(4) and (a)(6) were satisfied by application of collateral estoppel to th'e state court findings, but they assert that because the state court applied the benefit of the bargain measure of damages, the amount of compensatory damages was not actually litigated. However, the state court proceedings focused on whether the Roussoses had perpetrated a fraud and inflicted willful and malicious injury and eventuated in a judgment expressly awarding “compensatory damages” for defendants’ “commission of actual fraud in a fiduciary relationship.” Thus, the parties actually litigated the issue of *366 damages for fraud…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.