  |
  |
  |
    
  
   |
 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
were the result of mental impairment. Bankruptcy court erred in weighing evidence, making credibility determinations and drawing inferences unfavorable to the debtor.).
C. 11 U.S.C. S 727(a)(4):
" . . . knowingly and fraudulently, in or in connection with the case--(A) made a false oath or account, . . ."
Mercantile Peninsula Bank v. French (In re French), 499 F.3d 345 (4th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (Because fraudulent intent is an element of S 727(a)(4), it was inappropriate for the bankruptcy court to bar the debtor's discharge on summary judgment when affidavits from the debtor, from a doctor and from a CPA permitted a reasonable factfinder to conclude that the debtor lacked fraudulent intent.).
Erhard v. Roberts (In re Roberts), Nos. 50-36073 & 05-36122, 2007 WL 2089041 (9th Cir. July 19, 2007) ("Under S 727(a)(4)(A), [creditor] had to establish not only that [debtor] made a material, false statement or omission, but that he did so knowingly and with fraudulent intent. Even assuming that a 'reckless disregard of both the serious nature of the information sought and the necessary attention to detail and accuracy in answering may rise to the level of fraudulent intent necessary to bar a discharge,' the facts of this case simply do not rise to that level. The trustee testified that the number and type of omissions in this case were within normal parameters and that none of the omissions concealed anything of benefit to the bankruptcy estate.").
Baum v. United States Trustee (In re Baum), No. 06-10620, 2007 WL 2810001 (5th Cir. Sept. 26, 2007) (Undisclosed prepetition sales of a diamond tennis bracelet for $2,000 and a hand gun for $500 denied discharge under S 727(a)(4). Debtor's story was contradicted by other witnesses and by debtor's own schedules and statements.).
Freelife Int'l, LLC v. Butler (In re Butler), 359 B.R. 356 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. 2007) (table decision text at 2007 WL 866660) (Failure to reveal and falsely described business transfers and transactions barred the debtors' discharge under S 727(a)(4) notwithstanding claims that the business interests involved were valueless; facts were inconsistent - e-mails by the debtors indicated there was value to the transactions that was not revealed or misrepresented. "A statement or omission is material under S 727(a)(4) if it bears a relationship to the debtors' business transactions, or if it concerns the discovery of assets, business dealings, or the existence or disposition of the debtor's property. The recalcitrant debtor may not escape a S 727(a)(4) denial of discharge by admitting the omission and asserting that the omitted or falsely stated information concerned a worthless business relationship or holding.").
Hansen v. Moore (In re Moore), 368 B.R. 868 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2007) (Misrepresentations in the statements and schedules for purposes of S 727(a)(4)(A) and (B) included the failure to list related bankruptcy cases, the failure to list bank accounts, listing a deed of trust in favor of a nonexistent transferee, the failure to list life insurance policies and partnership interests and the failure to
