Monday, February 9, 2009

Cantu 2008 WL 5459834 (Bankr.S.D.Tex.)

Discharge 523(a)(6) - Jury's findings on intentional interference claims did not show actual intent to cause injury supporting nondischargeability.

Under Texas law, a jury's finding that a debtor acted with intentional interference was insufficient, alone, to show a subjective motive to injure, as would establish the actual intent to cause injury required for a judgment debt for tortious interference with contract and prospective contract to fall within the discharge exception for willful and malicious injury. Likewise, the jury's finding that the debtor's interferences with the judgment creditor's contract and prospective contract proximately caused the judgment creditor's injury was insufficient, alone, to show that the debtor acted with the objective substantial certainty of harm constituting actual intent to injure required to bring the judgment debt within the discharge exception.

0 comments: