Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: LARRY BRUCE THACKER, Debtor. LARRY BRUCE THACKER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SE PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC Defendant - Appellee.
Appellant Larry Thacker appeals the district court's affirmance of the bankruptcy court's denial of his discharge and grant of summary judgment for the appellee SE Property Holdings, LLC (SEPH) based on a continuing concealment theory and collateral estoppel. After careful review of the record and parties' briefs, along with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm.
We review a grant of summary judgement de novo. In re Optical Techs, Inc., 246 F.3d 1332, 1335 (11th Cir. 2001). This litigation originated in 2009 and has allowed Mr. Thacker to avoid satisfying a million dollar judgment owed to SEPH. Since then, several courts have affirmed the finding of fraudulent conduct exhibited by Mr. Thacker when he transferred most of his assets into a trust with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud SEPH. The district court determined that the bankruptcy court properly gave collateral estoppel effect to the findings of fraud in order to conclude that “Thacker is not the kind of honest debtor who is entitled to discharge.” Thacker v. SE Prop. Holdings, LLC, No. 5:15-cv-00183-MP-CJK, at *20 (N.D. Fla., Mar. 21, 2016). The bankruptcy court also properly applied the doctrine of continuing concealment to conclude that Thacker's fraudulent behavior continued after the initial transfers were made. We agree with the thorough and well-reasoned decision of the district court. Although denial of discharge is an extraordinary measure, “it is clear that these facts present a case in which the denial was warranted.” Id. at 21.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 16-11802
Decided: January 30, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)