Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Cruz (In re Cruz)

(Bankr. W.D. Ky., Issued June 11, 2014)

Judge Lloyd denies the debtor’s motion to dismiss the adversary proceeding, in which the title company sought a judgment that its claim on a promissory note was non-dischargeable under Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code. The debtor argued the complaint was time barred based on Kentucky’s five and ten-year limitations periods for claims based on fraud. The Court held that, while the debtor’s signature did not appear on the promissory note, the debtor’s signature on the mortgage—which contained a covenant that the debtor would pay the amount owed under the note—was sufficient to establish a claim upon a written agreement, which has a fifteen-year limitations period. The nondischargeability claim was also filed timely under the applicable bankruptcy rules. Opinion below.

2014-06-11 – stewart title v cruz

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s