This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Bankruptcy
Dischargeability
11 U.S.C. 523 (a) (2) (A)

Shenzhen Smart-In Ind. Co. Ltd., et al. v. Ray Cai, Peilin Hu

Published: Aug. 7, 2010 | Result Date: May 20, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:08-bk-31525-BR Bench Decision –  For Plaintiffs

Court

U.S. Bankruptcy


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Steve Qi


Defendant

Seong Lok Charles Pok


Facts

Defendant Ray Cai filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in December 2008, four days before the court trial against himself and CitiCross Inc., a trading company he owned, was to start in California State Superior Court in Pomona. The issue of alter ego was made moot when the court dismissed the action against Ray Cai personally, due to his filing of bankruptcy under Chapter 7. The case proceeded solely against CitiCross. Plaintiffs won a judgment against CitiCross Inc. for breach of contract and fraud, among other causes of action, with $2.982 million in damages awarded in December 2008. Plaintiffs proceeded to file a complaint against Ray Cai in an adversarial proceeding in bankruptcy court.

Result

After a two-day court trial, the court found for plaintiffs based on 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A), the fraud exception to dischargeabitliy, thus defendant Ray Cai is not allowed to discharge his debts to plaintiffs. Defendant's other debts, and those of his wife Peilin Hu's, were discharged.

Other Information

Plaintiff intends to appeal.


#112683

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390