When Crime Pays: Criminal Law Meets Bankruptcy Law
09-22-2008, 09:00 AM
#1
Administrator
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: C-172
Posts: 8,024
When Crime Pays: Criminal Law Meets Bankruptcy Law
I have been a lawyer for a long time and thought I've seen everything, but I guess not. This story also reminds me of the importance of hearing from all sides before making a ruling. By the way, this thread is NOT an opportunity for lawyer bashing, so don't bother posting the same old dreary diatribes. Thanks!
From Associated Press:
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Mark Poveromo feels ripped off twice over. A judge ordered him to repay money he collected from a builder convicted of stealing from him — and told him to kick in the thief's attorney fees and court costs, too.
Some legal experts say the case, in which a criminal case in Connecticut intersects a bankruptcy judgment filed in St. Louis, shows a need for Congress to revise the nation's bankruptcy laws to better treat people who are awarded money as part of ruling in a criminal case.
"This is an outrageous decision," said Anthony Sabino, a law professor at St. John's University and a bankruptcy expert. "I think it's a miscarriage of justice."
Judge: victim must pay back thief - U.S. business - MSNBC.com
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Mark Poveromo feels ripped off twice over. A judge ordered him to repay money he collected from a builder convicted of stealing from him — and told him to kick in the thief's attorney fees and court costs, too.
Some legal experts say the case, in which a criminal case in Connecticut intersects a bankruptcy judgment filed in St. Louis, shows a need for Congress to revise the nation's bankruptcy laws to better treat people who are awarded money as part of ruling in a criminal case.
"This is an outrageous decision," said Anthony Sabino, a law professor at St. John's University and a bankruptcy expert. "I think it's a miscarriage of justice."
Judge: victim must pay back thief - U.S. business - MSNBC.com
09-22-2008, 09:28 AM
#2
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,206
Sounds like the underlying issue is whether the builder intended to do the work when he took the money. If so, it's a bankruptcy issue even if his financial planning was irresponsible or unrealistic.
If he took the money with no intent of doing work, and filed BK as a smoke screen, then it's theft.
Obviously two courts took different views on that.
If he took the money with no intent of doing work, and filed BK as a smoke screen, then it's theft.
Obviously two courts took different views on that.
