X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Richard L. Fuqua served as the attorney for the buyer of a Kentucky horse farm in 1987. Fuqua and his associates structured a deal to generate excess funding to finance the purchase. Unrelated to the horse farm deal, Fuqua filed for bankruptcy in 1988. Sunbelt Savings filed an adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy case, alleging fraud in the horse-farm financing deal. Fuqua alleges that appellees provided false and misleading information about him to the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ) and that they participated in a criminal referral to the DOJ. The DOJ, which had been investigating the deal, intervened in the adversary proceeding. Fuqua was indicted in 1992. He was discharged from bankruptcy in 1993, and in 1994, he was acquitted of the 1992 charges. After Fuqua’s acquittal, the adversary proceeding went to trial. The bankruptcy judge directed a verdict in Fuqua’s favor in May 1997. Sunbelt appealed, but the appeal was dismissed in 1998. In 2000, Fuqua filed suit against Sunbelt for malicious prosecution. He alleged Sunbelt gave false and misleading information to the Justice Department. He claimed that the civil and subsequent criminal proceedings were terminated in his favor, and that as a result of Sunbelt’s conduct, he suffered damages to his reputation and suffered costs associated with his defense. He also alleged he suffered special damages: as a result of appellees’ conduct, he was indicted and subsequently tried for bank fraud. The trial court granted Sunbelt’s plea to the jurisdiction, which was based on the argument that because Fuqua’s claim was premised on the prior adversary proceeding, it was pre-empted by federal bankruptcy law. HOLDING:Reversed and remanded. The court concluded Fuqua alleged a cause of action for malicious prosecution based on appellees’ allegedly improper conduct in Fuqua’s bankruptcy proceeding. Noting that this is a case of first impression in Texas, the court pointed out that the U.S. Bankruptcy Code does not specifically pre-empt a claim for malicious prosecution, so any pre-emption would have to be by implication. Reciting the timeline of the adversary proceeding, the court found that Fuqua’s claim for malicious prosecution arose in September 1998 � five years after Fuqua was discharged from bankruptcy � when Sunbelt’s appeal was dismissed. The court thus held that allowing Fuqua’s malicious-prosecution claim to go forward would not interfere with the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction. Accordingly, the state court’s jurisdiction over the malicious-prosecution claim was not pre-empted. The court looked to rulings from other state and federal courts around the country, observing that the majority of courts that have considered the question have found that state claims alleging violations of the bankruptcy process are pre-empted. Nonetheless, the court shared the view of the minority of courts that have found otherwise. It agreed with one court that held the mere fact that Congress might have decided to allow bankruptcy court monetary awards against creditors who file in bad faith does not necessarily produce the conclusion that Congress intended to give these claims exclusively to the bankruptcy courts. OPINION:Linda Reyna Yanez, J.; Hinojosa, Yanez and Castillo, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.