Bartenwerfer v. Buckley

The text of § 523(a)(2)(A), written in the passive voice, focuses on the act, not the actor who committed it. Dean v. United States, 556 U. S. 568, 572 (2009). Contextually, neighboring provisions specify a particular debtor, while section 523(a)(2)(A) does not, supporting further that Congress was agnostic as to the actor who committed the fraud. In addition, this Court held in earlier iterations of this statute that the culpability of one partner is imputed on the entire partnership, and in reenacting the statute Congress did not take steps to correct that interpretation. Strang v. Bradner, 114 U. S. 555, 561 (1885).

Petitioners, a partnership, were found liable on a claim of nondisclosure of material facts to a purchaser of a home they sold. Petitioners filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy and attempted to discharge the judgment debt. The bankruptcy court held the judgment satisfied an exception for debts obtained due to fraud. 11 U. S. C. § 523(a)(2)(A). One partner knowingly concealed defects, and the court imputed that fraudulent intent onto the other partner. The Ninth Circuit’s Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversed as to the imputed partner. The Ninth Circuit reversed. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed. The text of the exception, written in the passive voice, focuses on the act, not the actor who committed it. Dean v. United States, 556 U. S. 568, 572 (2009). Contextually, neighboring provisions specify a particular debtor, while section 523(a)(2)(A) does not, supporting further that Congress was agnostic as to the actor who committed the fraud. In addition, this Court held in earlier iterations of this statute that the culpability of one partner is imputed on the entire partnership, and in reenacting the statute Congress did not take steps to correct that interpretation. Strang v. Bradner, 114 U. S. 555, 561 (1885). Affirmed.