Holding: Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendants’ conduct constituted the use of a court process, therefore, they cannot demonstrate that Defendants committed the tort of abuse of process under Arizona law. Even if the Debtors’ conduct was a use of a court process, the evidence does not demonstrate that Defendants’ conduct met Arizona’s requirement that it be solely based on an improper motive. Accordingly, a judgment in favor of the Debtors will be entered this date.
The District of Arizona offers a database of opinions for the years 2014 to current, listed by year and judge.
Holding: Before the court is a controversy which requires interpretation of the Debtors' confirmed plan, and based upon such interpretation, the court must determine whether the Debtors defaulted thereunder, or if some other just remedy may be applicable.
Holding: Mr. Beck, at all times in the Campos' transactions, acted ultra vires to the Dealership, because it was not within the corporation's charter to defraud customers and convert their funds, and thus, he and his marital community are liable to Mr. Campos. The court FINDS AND CONCLUDES that, by a preponderance of the evidence, Mr. Campos has proven a non-dischargeable liability under §§ 523(a)(2) and (6).