Morris v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham)
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia
355 B.R. 913 (2006)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Eddie Lou Morris (plaintiff) brought an action in a Georgia state superior court against real estate agent Willie Cunningham and others (defendants) based on the fraudulent sale to Morris of a property in College Park, Georgia. Morris specifically asserted a fraud claim against Cunningham in the action. Cunningham filed an answer and counterclaim, but he later failed to appear at trial, and the superior court entered a default judgment against him on the fraud claim. Following a jury trial on damages, the court entered a final judgment awarding Morris roughly $350,000 in compensatory damages from Cunningham and two other defendants, jointly and severally, plus $166,666.63 in punitive damages on Morris’s fraud claim from Cunningham individually. Cunningham never objected to or appealed the judgment, and he never paid Morris any of the awarded damages. Cunningham subsequently filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy. When Morris learned of Cunningham’s bankruptcy petition, she filed a complaint objecting to the dischargeability of her judgment claim. Morris asserted that the judgment was nondischargeable under the fraud exception to discharge in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) and that the doctrine of collateral estoppel prohibited the bankruptcy court from relitigating the fraud issue. The bankruptcy court considered Morris’s arguments and determined whether Morris was entitled to summary judgment on her claim of nondischargeability.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bihary, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.