In re Mesa
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida
232 B.R. 508 (1999)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Alberto Mesa (defendant) and Keith McKay purchased a residence in June 1996 as tenants in common. The home was purchased for $215,000, and Mesa testified that the present market value of the home was $250,000. The home was subject to first and second mortgages from NationsBank of $157,000 and $67,649.55, respectively. The second mortgage was intended to finance home improvements, but it was actually used to fund a new business started by McKay after McKay lost his job with Travelers Indemnity Company (Travelers) (plaintiff). Significant renovations were completed on the home, including remodeling of bathrooms, the kitchen, and garage. These renovations were funded with checks that McKay fraudulently caused to be issued from Travelers. Mesa was issued 17 checks totaling $147,977.70, Mesa’s mother was issued four checks totaling $35,528.15, and construction contractors and suppliers were issued checks totaling $194,909.76. All of the money received from these fraudulently issued checks was used to fund the renovations of the home. Mesa filed for bankruptcy and sought to exempt his interest in the residence from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to the homestead exemption under the Florida Constitution. Travelers filed an objection to this claimed homestead exemption. Mesa claimed that McKay stated that the checks were drawn on McKay’s retirement account.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ray, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
