Preview

Archers V. Warner: Court Case

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
641 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Archers V. Warner: Court Case
ARCHER V. WARNER
(01-1418) 538 U.S. 314 (2003)
283 F.3d 230, reversed and remanded.
NATURE OF CASE
Leonard and Arlene Warner sold the Warner Manufacturing Company to Elliott and Carol Archer. The Archers sued the Warners in North Carolina state court for fraud in connection to the sale. The settlement was that the Warners would pay the Archers $300,000. The Warners paid $200,000 and executed a promissory note for $100,000. The Warners failed to make payments on the promissory note and the Archers sued. The Warners filed for bankruptcy and the Archers brought the claim to the Bankruptcy Court to find the debt nondischargeable. Leonard Warner agreed to a consent order holding his debt nondischargeable while Arlene Warner contested nondischargeability. The Bankruptcy Court denied the Archers’ claim. The District Court and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
FACTS
Leonard and Arlene Warner bought the Warner Manufacturing Company for $250,000 in 1991. They sold the building to Elliott and Carol Archer for $610,000 six months later. They later sued the Warners in North Carolina state court for fraud in connection with the sale. The parties enter into a
…show more content…
127 (1979), a case where Brown sued Felsen in state court for money allegedly obtained through fraud in which a consent decree was entered that stipulated that Felsen would pay Brown a specified amount but didn’t indicate the payment was for fraudulent actions. Felsen failed to pay and entered into bankruptcy; Brown asked that the debt be held nondischargeable because it was for money obtained by fraud. The Supreme Court in that case held that claim preclusion did not prevent the Bankruptcy Court from looking beyond the record of the state court proceeding and the stipulation and consent judgment to decide whether the debt was for money obtained by fraud. In its new Archer ruling, the Supreme Court states that the Brown holding is

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    This case is an interesting one because it gets right into the core of the confliction between the proprieties of contractual agreement. This case is focused primarily on Osborne Development Corp. and the multiple defects customers are experiencing with their homes. These upset customers are suing this Corporation in attempts to collect reparations for the discrepancies faced. The homeowners who purchased homes form Osborne Development Corp. (ODC) negligently purchased these homes. According to the Home Buyers Warranty ( HBW), “ Any and all claims disputes and controversies by or between the Homeowner, the Builder, the Warrant Insure and/or HBW…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Law 531 Week 2 Team IRAC

    • 523 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Many professional athletes will continue to receive a regular salary during a serious injury that was sustained during their athletic duties, but for Cirque du Soleil performers this is not the case. When a member of Cirque du Soleil gets injured on the job they are treated like normal workers and only receive workers compensation benefits that can be thousands less a year than their normal salaries as a performer. This is a problem for the performers that lay their bodies on the line to promote Cirque du Soleil's $850 million per year business.…

    • 523 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    FACTS: Donnie McGraw signed a lease with Brown Realty Company located at 7307 South Westmorland Road, Dallas, Texas where he would be running a restaurant. On December 24, 2003 when McGraw signed the contract he agreed that the lease would be from February 15, 2004 through February 14, 2009 where he would be paying $3,450 a month a totaling $207, 000 at the end. On March 3, 2004 McGraw sent Gary Brown, the president of Brown Realty Company, a letter informing him of some equipment in need of repair in addition he sent him a second letter on October 5, 2004 complaining that the roof of the building was leaking, there was never a respond from Brown Realty. Documentation showed that McGraw made his rent payment on time from March through October of 2004; however in November rent payment was returned for insufficient funds which he then abandoned the premises in December.…

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ch 28 Question CPA Law

    • 284 Words
    • 1 Page

    After reading the case, it mentioned that Bitter’s argument has no merit since they all owed a fiduciary duty to the corporation that they were intending to form to which they were acting as stockholders. Bitter was the attorney for the corporation therefore he had an additional obligation. The record also showed that all negotiations for purchase of real state were made on behalf of Gomer’s Inc. Lastly the case mentions that Bitter cannot profit personally from this transaction and he cannot assert personal ownership of the real state against the other stockholders to whom he had to show good faith…

    • 284 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The plaintiff is Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., an investment firm. The defendant is Karen Howsam, a former investment client of Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. who between 1986 and 1994 bought interests in four limited partnerships.…

    • 408 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The next day and over the course of a month Fiore had people to make efforts from Nevada to show that the money was indeed legit and have not been earned illegally. The petitioner helped draft an affidavit to show probable cause for forfeiture of the funds. Fiore filed a lawsuit against Walden in the district court of Nevada saying Walden had no probable cause to search and seize the money and for him keeping the money even why he found out that the money was indeed legit. The District Court granted Walden motion to dismiss the case because Nevada had no jurisdiction over the case, for the seizer of the money took place in Georgia. During the appeal a divided panel ended up coming to the verdict that the search and seizer of the money could not support Nevada jurisdiction, however the Nevada had jurisdiction over the alleged false affidavit for knowing it would be a significant connection o Nevada also that delaying the funds would cause foreseeable harm which made this jurisdiction…

    • 546 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dissent: The uncle company is required to pay the 5000 and interest on top of that because the plaintiff followed the agreement by restraining from drinking, smoking, and…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 478 U.S. 186 Bowers v. Hardwick Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0478_0186_ZS.html…

    • 1550 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Star Charters v. Figueroa, 192 Ill. 2d 47, 733 N.E.2d 1282, 2000 Ill. LEXIS 987, 248 Ill. Dec. 284 (2000)…

    • 293 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Deborah Evans Met Aaron Conway and his wife Barb Conway five years ago as part of the religious sect Canyon County Family Society that has existed for 25 years with 120 members, which is part of the Mormon Church which strongly believes in polygamist marriages. Ms. Evans moved in with the Conway’s two years ago, in which time Mr. Conway and Ms. Evans began dating even though he has been married to his wife Barb for 10 years, and have five children together. In 2011Mr. Conway decided he wanted to be married to Deborah Evans as well for a second wife, as it is part of their religious beliefs to do and applied for a marriage license in canyon County, Utah. Mr. Conway and Ms. Evans then proceeded to the county clerk’s office and applied for their marriage license where they were denied, and informed at that point that polygamy in the state of Utah is not legal, and since Mr. Conway was already married, they could not get a marriage license. The Conway’s and Ms. Evans at this point sued the state of Utah in trial court for their right to practice polygamy based off of their religious beliefs. The trial court ruled against them, and denied the group the marriage license. At this point the Conway’s and Ms. Evans would like to appeal the trial court decision.…

    • 1347 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    26.1)Mechanic's Lien. Ironwood Exploration, Inc. (Ironwood) owned a lease on oil and gas property located in Duchesne County, Utah. Ironwood contracted to have Lantz Drilling and Exploration Company, Inc. (Lantz), drill an oil well on the property. Therafter, Lantz rented equipment from Graco Fishing and Rental Tools, Inc. (Graco), for use in drilling the well. Graco billed Lantz for these rentals, but Lantz did not pay. Graco filed a notice of mechanic's lien on the well in the amount of $19,766. Ironwood, which had paid Lantz, refused to pay Graco. Graco sued to forclose on its mechanic's lien. Who wins? Graco Fising and Rental Tools, Inc. v. Ironwood Exploration, Inc., P.2d 1074, 98 Utah Adv. Rep. 28. Web 1998 Utal Lexis 125 (Supreme Court of Utah)…

    • 1724 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1991 about 10,000 Exxon dealers sued Exxon Corporation in federal court, alleging that the corporation had engaged in an extensive scheme to overcharge them for fuel. A jury found in favor of the plaintiffs, but the District Court judge certified the case for review on the question of supplemental jurisdiction. Some of the multiple plaintiffs in the case had claims that did not meet the minimum amount necessary to qualify for federal diversity jurisdiction (currently $75,000). In 1990 Congress had enacted 28 U.S.C. Section 1367, overturning Finley v. United States, which had narrowly interpreted federal courts' power to confer supplementary jurisdiction on related claims. The question for the District Court was whether Section 1367 also overturned Zahn v. International Paper Co., which ruled that each plaintiff had to separately meet the minimum amount-in-controversy requirement. The District Court accepted the plaintiffs' argument that Section 1367 gave federal courts power to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs with related claims, even if some plaintiffs' claims did not meet the required amount. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court's ruling on supplemental jurisdiction. However, this ruling conflicted with the ruling of another Circuit, which had taken the opposite view of Section 1367's scope (see Ortega v. Star-Kist Foods, No. 04-79). The Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the cases for argument.…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Jenner Trial "The smallpox was always present, filling the churchyards with corpses, tormenting with constant fears all whom it had stricken, leaving on those whose lives it spared the hideous traces of its power, turning the babe into a changeling at which the mother shuddered, and making the eyes and cheeks of the bighearted maiden objects of horror to the lover" (Macaulay). Imagine walking down the busiest street in 1700s London, and you only saw a dozen people. In every window, bodies swelling with bumps were everywhere. Dead, ravaged bodies were tossed aside. No one could escape smallpox’s destruction.…

    • 997 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Mark Realty Inc., a real estate broker, entered into four separate agreements with owner Tilman A. Rogness. Mark Realty was entitled to “exclusive right of sale.” For a stated period of time, this agreement gave the broker the exclusive right of sale for the property for a stated price and on stated terms. During the time provided, Rogness “canceled, revoked, and terminated” the brokerage agreements before the properties sold. The broker sued on account that brokerage commission was never received from the owner. The owner argued that since he canceled the contracts before the properties were sold, the broker never performed their duties and therefor was not entitled to commission. The trial judge ruled that Mark Realty Inc. had entered into a unilateral contract with Rogness which meant that the broker would only receive commission if he performed by “finding a purchaser of the above property.” The trial judge ruled in favor of the owner (University of Phoenix, 2012, Mark realty, Inc. v. Rogness).…

    • 444 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    civil procedure:

    • 1631 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This is captured in order 13 rule 83 where if the court justifies that the resistance or obstruction was occasioned without any just cause by the judgment-debtor, or by some other person at his instigation, it shall direct that the applicant be put into possession of the property, and, where the applicant is still resisted or obstructed in obtaining possession,…

    • 1631 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays