Herbert
Herbert v. Davies (In re Davies)
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Mund, J.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (Docket # 23)
Background:
Plaintiff Paul Herbert (“Plaintiff’) commenced an adversary complaint against debtors Donald and Pamela Davies (“Debtors”) on 2/1/11, pursuant to 11 USC § 523 (a)(2), (a)(4), and (a)(6) (and also sought a determination under § 524 that, even if the debt is not declared nondis-chargeable as to one Debtor, the nondis-chargeability should extend to community property of Debtors).
After the Court granted Debtors’ initial motion to dismiss with leave to amend as to § 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4) and(a)(6), but not as to § 523(a)(2)(B) (see Docket # 7), Plaintiff filed a “First Amended Adversary Complaint” (the “Complaint”). Like Plaintiffs initial complaint, the Complaint refers to and incorporates a state court arbitration judgment awarded in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Debtors in the sum of $1,636,107 (the “Judgment”). The Judgment confirms an Amended Arbitration Award entered by Honorable Alan B. *458 Haber (ret.) on 2/10/10 (the “Award”), which found that Debtor Donald Davies’ conduct during a partnership dissolution violated the relevant provisions…