Fischer, In re, 96-55003
| Citation | 116 F.3d 388 |
| Decision Date | 09 May 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-55003,96-55003 |
| Parties | , Bankr. L. Rep. P 77,421, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4538, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 12,207, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7527 In re Leonard I. FISCHER, Debtor. KEY BAR INVESTMENTS, INC., Appellant, v. Leonard I. FISCHER, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Gregory S. Cilli, San Diego, CA, for appellant.
Leonard I. Fischer, San Diego, CA, pro se, for appellee.
Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Ashland, Ollason, and Carlson, Judges, Presiding. BAP No. SC-94-02102-AsOC.
Before: WALLACE, THOMPSON and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Key Bar Investments, Inc. (Key Bar) appeals from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) affirmance of the bankruptcy court's summary judgment in favor of Leonard Fischer. The bankruptcy court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(a)-(b) and 1334(a). The BAP had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(b)(1). We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d), and we affirm.
In October 1991, Cahn-Fischer Enterprises, Inc. (CFE) purchased Precision Tune, an automotive maintenance and repair shop, from Key Bar for $220,400 ($95,000 in cash and $125,400 in a promissory note, payable in monthly installments). After a few months, CFE asserted that Key Bar had misrepresented Precision Tune's income at the time of sale and demanded compensation. Both Key Bar and CFE signed a "Compromise Agreement and Mutual Release" (Agreement), dated April 12, 1992, to resolve this dispute. Under the Agreement, which Key Bar drafted, Key Bar paid $5,000 upon execution and reduced the promissory note by $5,000. In addition, Robert Bellowe, president of Key Bar, worked at Precision Tune to provide managerial training.
In November 1992, CFE stopped making payments on the promissory note and abandoned the business. Key Bar demanded payment from Lawrence Cahn and Leonard Fischer of CFE, but both failed to fulfill their obligations. On May 11, 1993, Fischer filed for bankruptcy. On September 13, 1994, Key Bar filed a complaint seeking nondischargeability of its claim pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2), judgment for the amount of the note, and related damages. The complaint alleged that Fischer misrepresented both the value of the assets that he owned and his business operating experience, thereby inducing Key Bar to sell Precision Tune to him.
Fischer moved for summary judgment, contending that the Agreement extinguished Key Bar's claim. Fischer asserted that the Agreement, which Key Bar drafted, released the parties from liability for any known or unknown misrepresentations. In other words, Fischer argued that when determining dischargeability, a court should look only to the terms of the contract and not examine the original sales negotiation for evidence of fraud.
The bankruptcy court granted Fischer's motion for summary judgment. It held that the Agreement was a novation of the original purchase contract, and that its terms clearly barred any claims arising out of any alleged misrepresentations in the buyer's financial statements. Further, the bankruptcy court concluded that the Agreement expressly waived the protections of California Civil Code § 1542, thereby allowing the parties to release then unknown claims for fraud. The bankruptcy court also concluded that the Agreement stated that the parties had not relied on any inducements or representations in signing the Agreement. In a well-reasoned unpublished decision, the BAP affirmed the judgment of the district court.
We review decisions of the BAP de novo. In re Alsberg, 68 F.3d 312, 314 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 1568, 134 L.Ed.2d 667 (1996). As both the bankruptcy court and the BAP concluded, our decision in Gonder v. Kelley, 372 F.2d 94 (9th Cir.1967), squarely controls this case. In Gonder, we affirmed for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion, In re Kelley, 259 F.Supp. 297 (N.D.Cal.1965). In In re Kelley, the district court held that "if it is shown that the note, by express agreement is given and received, as a discharge of the original obligation or tort action, then the execution of the note extinguishes the tort action and it would be error for the court to look behind the note." Id. at 299.
Yet that is exactly what Key Bar asks us to do in this case. We agree with the bankruptcy court and the BAP that the Agreement, by its own terms, created a novation, extinguishing all claims arising out of the sale of Precision Tune. The Agreement, which Key Bar drafted and asked Fischer to sign, repeatedly indicates that it serves as a novation:
1. * * * By executing this settlement agreement, each of the parties intends to and does hereby extinguish the obligations heretofore existing between them.
* * *
3. Each party, in consideration of the promises and concessions made by the other, hereby compromises and settles any and all past, present or future claims, demands, obligations, or causes of action,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Fultz
...claims arising out of the original transaction between the parties clearly created a novation. Key Bar Investments, Inc. v. Fischer (In re Fischer), 116 F.3d 388, 390-91 (9th Cir.1997), amended by 127 F.3d 819 (9th Cir.1997). Thus, the debt at issue in the bankruptcy proceedings was not the......
-
In re Francis
...complaint without regard to the merits of the underlying dispute. In re West, 22 F.3d 775 (7th Cir.1994); Key Bar Invs., Inc. v. Fischer (In re Fischer), 116 F.3d 388 (9th Cir.1997). The basis of this nondischargeability action is the fraud confessed by the Debtor in the letter attached to ......
-
In re Warner, 00-2525.
...freedom to enter into settlement agreements, regardless of the nature of the claim subject to the settlement agreement. See In re Fischer, 116 F.3d 388 (9th Cir.1997); In re West, 22 F.3d 775 (7th Cir.1994); Maryland Casualty Co. v. Cushing, 171 F.2d 257 (7th Cir.1948). Under this theory, p......
-
In re Detrano
...had been extinguished and replaced with a contractual debt that could be discharged in bankruptcy. The Ninth Circuit, in In re Fischer, 116 F.3d 388 (9th Cir.1997), held similarly that a settlement agreement resolving the parties' dispute regarding debtor's purchase of an automotive repair ......
-
Supreme Court Docket Report - 2001 Term, Number 20 / June 24, 2002
...nondischargeable because it was obtained by fraud creates a new contract debt that is dischargeable in bankruptcy. See In re Fischer, 116 F.3d 388, 390 (9th Cir. 1997) [link 2] [link 3] [link 4]; In re West, 22 F.3d 775, 777-778 (7th Cir. 1994). The panel majority, like the bankruptcy and d......
-
The Preclusive Effect of Disgorgement Orders in Non-dischargeability Actions Under § 523(a)(19)
...2005).74. Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 286-87 (1991) (emphasis added).75. See, e.g., Key Bar Invs. Inc., v. Fischer (In re Fischer), 116 F.3d 388, 390 (9th Cir. 1997) (citing In re Kelley, 259 F. Supp. 297 (N.D. Cal. 1965) (holding that an agreement settling allegations of misrepresentat......
-
Discharging Civil Settlement Obligations in Bankruptcy After Archer v. Warner
...Greenberg, supra, note 8. 11. Maryland Casualty Co., supra, note 6. 12. Id. at 259. 13. West, supra, note 7. 14. Id. at 777. 15. Fischer, 116 F.3d 388, 390 (9th Cir. 16. Id. at 390, quoting In re Kelly, 259 F.Supp. 297, 299 (N.D.Cal. 1965). 17. Id. 18. Greenberg, supra, note 8. 19. Id. at 1......