green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
39.7 score
“a debtor's assertion that he owns certain property free and clear of other liens is a statement respecting his financial condition.... consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor's discharge.”
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Crocker v. Matthews (In re Matthews)
a debtor's assertion that he owns certain property free and clear of other liens is a statement respecting his financial condition.... consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor's discharge.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fonz Inc. v. Rubin
Del. 1996) (misrepresentation of conditions to purchase an asset); Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984) (representation that debtor owned property free and clear of liens); Hudson Valley Water Resources, Inc. v. Boice (In re Boice), 149 B.R. 40, 46 (Bankr.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
BRRRT Properties, LLC v. Pfeifer
Cf. Appling, 138 S. Ct. at 1758-63 ; Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir. 1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Moody National Bank v. Shurley
Indeed, whether a debtor’s assets are encumbered “may be the most significant information about his financial condition.”103 The alleged misrepresentations are thus “statements respecting the debtor’s financial condition,” and are not actionable under section 523(a)(2)(A). 98 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(2)(A). 99 Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling, 138 S. Ct. 1752, 1761 (2018). 100 Id. 101 Id. 102 Hutchens Decl. 2, 5, 8, 10, ECF No. 22. 103 Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling
Subparagraph (A) bars discharge of debts arising from “false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a state- ment respecting the debtor’s . . . financial condition.” Subparagraph (B), in turn, bars discharge of debts arising from a materially false “statement . . . respecting the —————— 1 Compare In re Bandi, 683 F. 3d 671, 676 (CA5 2012) (a statement about a single asset is not a statement respecting the debtor’s financial condition); In re Joelson, 427 F. 3d 700, 714 (CA10 2005) (same), with In re Appling, 848 F. 3d 958, 960 (CA11 2017) (a statem…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Randall Haler v. Boyington Capital Grp, L.L.C.
See Appling v. Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP (In re Appling), 848 F.3d 953, 961 (11th Cir. 2017), petition for cert. filed, (Apr. 11, 2017) (No. 16-1215); Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Carver Federal Savings Bank v. Cedillo (In re Cedillo)
For example, the Fourth Circuit has stated that Bankruptcy Code Section 523(a)(2)(B) refers to a much broader class of statements than formal financial statements, which are “those ‘respecting the debtor’s ,.. financial condition.’ ” Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
R. Scott Appling v. Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP
(2×)
The Fourth Circuit has held that a “debtor’s assertion that he owns certain property free and clear of other liens is a statement respecting his financial condition.” Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fulton, N.A. v. Robbins (In re Robbins)
Only the Fourth Circuit broadly interprets the term “financial condition.” See Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir. 1984) (concluding that “Congress did not speak in terms of financial statements.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Higgins v. Nunnelee (In re Nunnelee)
The Fifth Circuit has held that the term “financial condition” should be narrowly construed to mean the “general overall finan cial condition of an entity or individual, that is, the overall value of property and income as compared to debt and liabilities.” Bandi v. Becnel (In re Bandi), 683 F.3d 671, 676 (5th Cir. 2012)(citing Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir. 1984)), In Bandi, the debtors represented that they owned certain property in order to lead the creditor to believe that them “personal guarantees of a loan.. .would be backed by some measure of wealth.…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Privitera v. Curran (Curran)
Privitera argues that under the broad approach, the List of Collateral clearly constituted a statement regarding Cur-ran’s financial condition, because it “falsely asserted that the collateral was unencumbered (or failed to disclose that the collateral was encumbered).” In support, she cites Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984), in which the court held that a debt- or’s oral misrepresentation that certain property he owned was unencumbered at the time he pledged it as collateral for a loan was a statement regarding the debt- or’s financial…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Jones v. Owens (In re Owens)
(3×)
The next year, in Engler v. Van Steinburg, (In re Van Steinburg) 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984), the Court dealt with facts superficially similar to those at bar.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Stephen Bandi v. Christopher Becnel
Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984). 33 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Anthony Stelmokas v. Vytautas Kodzius
See In re Jorelson, 427 F.3d at 705 (narrow view); In re Bogdanovich, 292 F.3d at 112 (noting inconsistent views but declining to choose); Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984) (broad view).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Stelmokas v. Kodzius
See In re Joelson, 427 F.3d at 705 (narrow view); In re Bogdanovich, 292 F.3d at 112 (noting inconsistent views but declining to choose); Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984) (broad view).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Nash-Bone v. Ramey (In Re Ramey)
Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984) (false oral statement that collateral being offered as security was unencumbered was a statement concerning the debtor’s financial condition and was therefore not a basis for holding the debt nondischargeable because it was not in writing as required by Sec. 523(a)(2)(B)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Material Products International, Ltd. v. Ortiz (In Re Ortiz)
Credit Union v. Kaspar (In re Kaspar), 125 F.3d 1358, 1361 (10th Cir.1997), quoting Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d at 1060-61.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
American Bank of Commerce v. Powell (In Re Powell)
See, e.g., Armbrustmacher v. Redburn (In re Redburn), *211 202 B.R. 917, 925-26 (Bankr.W.D.Mich.1996); Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cadwell v. Joelson (In Re Joelson)
Consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor’s discharge.” Id. at 1361 (quoting Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Voyatzoglou v. Hambley (In Re Hambley)
Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984)(holding that a debtor’s assertion that he owned property free and clear of liens is a statement respecting his financial condition).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lyndon Property Insurance v. Adams (In Re Adams)
See In re Bogdanovich, 292 F.3d 104 , 112-13 (2d Cir.2002); Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984); In re Copeland, 291 B.R. 740, 780-82 (Bankr.E.D.Tenn.2003).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cadwell v. Joelson (In Re Joelson)
(2×)
Id. at 1361 (quoting Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984)). .
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Baker v. Sharpe (In Re Sharpe)
Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Tompkins & McMaster v. Whitenack (In Re Whitenack)
(2×)
In In re Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984), the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a debtor’s assertion that he owned property free and clear of liens is a statement respecting his financial condition and therefore such assertion must be in writing to bar the debt- or’s discharge.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Tallant v. Kaufman (In Re Tallant)
(2×)
Instead it referred to a much broader class of statements — those ‘respecting the debtor’s ... financial condition.’ ”) (quoting Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984) (citations omitted)); In re Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984) (holding that "[a] debtor's assertion that he owns certain property free and clear of other liens is a statement respecting his financial condition’’); McCrary v. Barrack (In re Barrack), 201 B.R. 985, 987-88 (Bankr.S.D.Cal.1996) (stating that oral misrepresentations about the debtors’ ownership of a home, mon…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Bellco First Federal v. Kaspar
Consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor’s discharge. 744 F.2d at 1060-61 (citation omitted).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Kurtis George Kaspar and Linda Ann Kaspar, Debtors, Bellco First Federal Credit Union v. Kurtis George Kaspar and Linda Ann Kaspar
Consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor’s discharge. 744 F.2d at 1060-61 (citation omitted).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
First Natl. Bank v. Thomas M. Pontow
In Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir. 1984), the court said: "Congress did not speak in terms of financial statements.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
First National Bank of Olathe, Kansas v. Thomas M. Pontow Ann M. Pontow
In Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984), the court said: “Congress did not speak in terms of financial statements.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Kaufman v. Tallant (In Re Tallant)
In re Ransford, 202 B.R. at 3 ; Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984); In re Mercado, 144 B.R. 879, 882 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1992). 1.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Armbrustmacher v. Redburn (In Re Redburn)
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
In re Van Steinburg, supra at 1060-61. 23 .
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Norcross v. Ransford (In Re Ransford)
(3×)
Instead it referred to a much broader class of statements — those ‘respecting the debtor’s ... financial condition.’ ” 744 F.2d at 1060-61.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bellco First Federal Credit Union v. Kaspar (In Re Kaspar)
Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984) (“statement must be in writing to bar the debtor’s discharge”); In re Kerbaugh, 162 B.R. 255, 261 (Bankr.D.N.D.1993) (“An objecting creditor that relies on a debt- or’s oral misrepresentations of his or her financial wherewithal will not be entitled to nondischargeability determination under section 523(a)(2)(B).”); In re Panaia, 61 B.R. 959, 961 (Bankr.D.Mass.1986) (dismissed section 523(a)(2)(B) claim since “debtor’s statements, even assuming they were false and although made under oath, were oral”).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Beneficial National Bank v. Priestley (In Re Priestley)
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
In re Engler at 1060.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
John J. O'Connor, CPO, Inc. v. Booker (In Re Booker)
See In re Blackwell, 702 F.2d 490 , 492 (1983) (statements to the effect that “the business is growing” and "is very successful” are statements respecting the debtor's financial condition); and In re Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (1984) (Congress "referred to a much broader class of statements — those” "respecting the debtor's ... financial condition,” and whether certain pieces of debtor’s property were encumbered was such a statement).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Hudson Valley Water Resources, Inc. v. Boice (In Re Boice)
Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Chrysler First Financial Services Corp. v. Rhodes (In Re Rhodes)
E.g., Blackwell v. Dabney, 702 F.2d 490, 491-92 (4th Cir.1983); Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United Virginia Bank v. Cook (In Re Cook)
The Fourth Circuit has construed § 523(a)(2)(B) to apply to all statements by the debtor respecting the debtor’s financial condition and need not be a formal written financial statement such as a “typical balance sheet or a profit and loss statement.” In re Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060 , 12 B.C.D. 466, 467 (4th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Seepes v. Schwartz (In Re Schwartz)
Therefore, a seventh element of fraud is imposed if the misrepresentation relates to financial condition; it must be in writing. ” [Emphasis added] Accord Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984); Blackwell v. Dabney (In re Blackwell), 702 F.2d 490 (4th Cir.1983).
cited
Cited "see"
First Recovery, LLC v. Sanders
See Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
cited
Cited "see"
First Recovery, LLC v. Sanders
See Engler v. Van Steinberg, 744 F.2d 1060 , 1061 (4th Cir. 1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Conestoga Title Insurance Co. v. Patchell (In re Patchell)
See Engler v. Van Steinburg, (In re Van Steinburg) 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir, 1984); Blackwell v, Dadney, 702 F.2d 490 , 491 (4th Cir. 1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
American Asset Finance, LLC v. Feldman (In re Feldman)
See In re Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060 , 1061 (4th Cir.1984); In re Jacobs, 460 B.R. 149, 155 (Bkrtcy.E.D.Mich.2011); In re Ortiz, 441 B.R. 73, 83 (Bkrtcy.W.D.Tex.2010); In re Kleiman, 2007 WL 1480716 , at *4 (Bkrtcy.D.NJ.
cited
Cited "see"
Jacobs v. Versa Corp. (In Re Jacobs)
See Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Weiss v. Alicea (In Re Alicea)
The broad view, on the other hand, defines statements respecting financial condition to encompass “statements concerning the condition or quality of a single asset or liability impacting on the debtor’s financial picture.” In re Priestley, 201 B.R. at 882 (misrepresentation of conditions to purchase of asset, the proceeds of which were pledged to repay *503 bank loan, impacted the debtor’s financial picture and his ability to repay the bank loan); see Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984) (representation that debtor owned property free and…
discussed
Cited "see"
McCrary v. Barrack (In Re Barrack)
See, on the other hand, In re Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1061 (4th Cir.1984) (oral statement that property is not subject to hens is a statement respecting financial condition and is not actionable under Section 523(a)(2) as there is no writing — "Indeed, whether his assets are encumbered may be the most significant information about his financial condition.”). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
Hecht's v. Valdes (In Re Valdes)
See generally, Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060 (CA4 1984); Blackwell v. Dabney, 702 F.2d 490 (CA4 1983). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
Frankford Bank v. Chryst (In Re Chryst)
See Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Riggs National Bank of Washington v. Ross (In Re Ross)
See Engler v. Van Steinburg, 744 F.2d 1060, 1060-61 (4th Cir.1984) and Collier on Bankruptcy § 523.09[1].
discussed
Cited "see"
Gehlhausen v. Olinger (In Re Olinger)
See Engler v. Van Steinburg (In re Van Steinburg), 744 F.2d 1060 (4th Cir.1984) (Representation that livestock and farm implements were not encumbered must be in writing to be actionable); Blackwell v. Dabney (In re Blackwell), 702 F.2d 490 (4th Cir.1983) (Statements that a company was top-notch, that it was successful, doing well and blooming is not actionable unless in writing since it was a statement concerning the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition); Harper v. Richey (In re Richey), 103 B.R. 25 (Bkrtcy.D.Conn.1989); In re Prestridge, 45 B.R. 681 (Bkrtey.W.D.Tn.1985); In re Pa…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Robert Engler
v.
Louis Edward Van Steinburg, in Re Louis Edward Van Steinburg, Jr., A/K/A Edward L. Van Steinburg, and Dorothy M. Van Steinburg, Debtors
v.
Louis Edward Van Steinburg, in Re Louis Edward Van Steinburg, Jr., A/K/A Edward L. Van Steinburg, and Dorothy M. Van Steinburg, Debtors
84-1189.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Oct 1, 1984.
Cited by 48 opinions | Published
11 Collier Bankr.Cas.2d 1190, 12 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 466,
Bankr. L. Rep. P 70,054
Robert ENGLER, Appellant,
v.
Louis Edward VAN STEINBURG, Appellee.
In re Louis Edward VAN STEINBURG, Jr., a/k/a Edward L. Van
Steinburg, and Dorothy M. Van Steinburg, Debtors.
No. 84-1189.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Argued Aug. 29, 1984.
Decided Oct. 1, 1984.
James W. Stone, Hagerstown, Md. (Miller, Oliver & Beachley, Hagerstown, Md., on brief), for appellant.
Charles A. Castle, Frederick, Md., on brief), for appellee.
Before WINTER, Chief Judge, SPROUSE, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge:
1
Robert Engler appeals an order in bankruptcy discharging a debt owed to him by Louis Van Steinburg, a bankrupt. By consent of the parties, the case was appealed directly to this court. We affirm.
2
Engler loaned Van Steinburg $5,500, taking a security interest in livestock and farm implements. Van Steinburg assured Engler orally throughout the loan negotiations that Engler would have a first priority security interest in the property, even though Van Steinburg knew that other creditors had superior liens. All statements in the mortgages securing Engler were accurate.
3
The Bankruptcy Act provides that a debtor may not discharge debts for money obtained by false pretenses, false representations, or fraud, except that false statements "respecting the debtor's ... financial condition" must be in writing in order for the debt to be nondischargeable. 11 U.S.C. Secs. 523(a)(2)(A), 523(a)(2)(B).
4
The bankruptcy court held that the debtor's oral misrepresentations that he owned the property free and unencumbered related to his financial condition. We find no error in the court's application of the statute to the facts in this case.
5
Engler relies on In re Pollina, 31 B.R. 975 (D.C.D.N.J.1983), which held that a debtor's false representations that he owned certain collateral free and clear of all liens barred discharge of the debt pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(2)(A). The representations were in writing, and according to our interpretation of the statute they would bar discharge under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(2)(B), so we do not differ from the result reached by the Pollina court. Pollina, however, went on to say that a statement respecting the debtor's financial condition means a formal financial statement, such as a typical balance sheet or a profit and loss statement, and not a statement that specific collateral is owned free of other encumbrances. We cannot accept this aspect of Pollina.
6
Concededly, a statement that one's assets are not encumbered is not a formal financial statement in the ordinary usage of that phrase. But Congress did not speak in terms of financial statements. Instead it referred to a much broader class of statements--those "respecting the debtor's ... financial condition." A debtor's assertion that he owns certain property free and clear of other liens is a statement respecting his financial condition. Indeed, whether his assets are encumbered may be the most significant information about his financial condition. Indeed, whether his assets are enumbered may be the most significant information about his financial condition. Consequently, the statement must be in writing to bar the debtor's discharge. Blackwell v. Dabney, 702 F.2d 490 (4th Cir.1983).
7
AFFIRMED.