Problem 1: Suppose Markell asks Ponoroff to lend him $10,000. Ponoroff declines; he says he wants a solvent guarantor before he will lend a dime. Markell tells Ponoroff that his father, Epstein, has a net worth of $100,000, and will sign a guaranty. Ponoroff accepts Markell's word, and the transaction is done, with Epstein giving a guaranty. Trouble is, Epstein is insolvent, and Markell knows that. Markell doesn't pay the debt, and both Markell and Epstein file Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Ponoroff files a timely complaint under section 523(a)(2)(A) objecting to the dischargeability of his claim against Markell. Markell admits all the facts (including his knowledge of Epstein's insolvency), but still brings a motion for summary judgment and wins. Can you figure out why? What was Ponoroff's mistake? What would you have done differently if you had represented Ponoroff? Would it have changed the outcome?
Problem 2: Nickles, a contractor, is hired by Epstein to build Epstein an expensive new house in a fashionable Richmond neighborhood. Ordinarily, the contract price is paid in installments (i.e. progress payments). However, Nickles is having some serious cash flow problems so he offers Epstein a sizeable discount if Epstein would pay up-front. Nickles tells Epstein, "this way, your job will be my numero uno priority." Being naïve (and something of a simpleton) Epstein, who speaks a little Spanish, agrees. Only a third of the way through the project, Nickles walks off the job and, in the face of multiple suits against him by other creditors, files for relief under Chapter 7. Epstein hires a new contractor to complete the job, but, as a result, ends up paying several hundred thousand more than what Nickles had agreed to charge. If Epstein brings a complaint objecting to the discharge of his claim against Nickles for the excess paid to have his house built above the agreed-upon contract price, what will he need to show at trial in order to prevail under section 523(a)(2)(A). See De Witt v. Stewart (In re Stewart), 941 F.3d 509 (1st Cir. 2020). PLEASE REFERENCE THE CASE
Problem 3: D is a 50-year-old paralegal with a junior college degree and a gross annual income of approximately $30,000. In September 2018, C sent D an unsolicited, pre-approved credit card with a S3,000 limit. D used the credit card to obtain 14 separate cash advances between September 15 and October 15 totaling more than $3,200 from automatic teller machines in casinos. In January 2019, D filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief. She had lost more than $25,000 gambling in 2018 and, as a result, had to file for Chapter 7 relief. At the time, D owed C more than $3,500, including interest. If D files under Chapter 7, can C's $3,500 claim be excepted from the discharge? Is section 523(a) (2)(C) helpful? Is the Manriquez case below helpful (or not)?
Problem 4: Ponoroff "borrows" Epstein's prize pink Yugo (without Epsteins permission) and takes it for a spin. He drives it into a telephone pole because the brakes are about what you would expect. Before abandoning the wrecked car, Ponoroff rifles through the glove compartment and finds a wad of cash Epstein had just received for giving bar review lectures. Ponoroff pockets the money. Shortly thereafter, Ponoroff files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy-he has lots of other debts. Epstein brings a nondischargeability action under sections 523(a)(4) and (a)(6) alleging, respectively, larceny under federal law and conversion under state law. Assess Epstein's claims.