In re: Barlow, No. 13-8018 (6th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
The bankruptcy court held that a district court judgment entered against the Debtor was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6). The Sixth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed, holding that the bankruptcy court properly gave the district court’s findings preclusive effect as to whether the judgment was the result of the Debtor’s willful and malicious injury.
Download PDF
ELECTRONIC CITATION: 2013 FED App. 0006P (6th Cir.) File Name: 13b0006p.06 BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE SIXTH CIRCUIT In re: DAVID BARLOW, E. BARLOW; MARIA E. Debtors. ______________________________________ HER, INC.; REAL LIVING, INC.; HARLEY E. ROUDA, JR.; KAIRA STURDIVANT ROUDA; HARLEY E. ROUDA, SR., Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. DAVID E. BARLOW, Defendant - Appellant. ______________________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 13-8018 Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio Case No. 11-52415; Adv. No. 11-02445 Submitted: November 5, 2013 Decided and Filed: November 14, 2013 Before: EMERSON, HARRIS, and McIVOR, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judges. ____________________ COUNSEL ON BRIEF: Bradley K. Baker, PORTER, WRIGHT, MORRIS & ARTHUR LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees. David E. Barlow, Delaware, Ohio, pro se. ____________________ OPINION ____________________ GEORGE W. EMERSON, JR., Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge. The issue before the Panel on appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in determining that a district court judgment entered against Debtor David E. Barlow ( Debtor ) was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). After reviewing the record, the parties briefs, and applicable law, the Panel concludes that the bankruptcy court properly gave the district court s findings preclusive effect as to whether the district court judgment was the result of the Debtor s willful and malicious injury. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the bankruptcy court s well-written opinion entered on September 26, 2013, HER, Inc. v. Barlow (In re Barlow), 478 B.R. 320 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2012), we affirm. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
