Drafting § 523 complaints requires extensive legal research across Bankruptcy Code provisions, careful fact extraction from multiple documents, and precise formatting to meet court requirements. Attorneys spend hours reviewing case files, researching non-dischargeability grounds, and ensuring proper citation of jurisdiction and venue statutes—time that could be spent on case strategy.
Drafting a § 523 complaint requires mastering complex pleading standards, including Rule 9(b) particularity for fraud claims, circuit-specific element tests, and strict 60-day filing deadlines. Attorneys must synthesize extensive factual records, apply nuanced legal precedents, and ensure compliance with federal bankruptcy rules while building a compelling narrative that survives dismissal motions.
CaseMark analyzes your case documents to extract relevant facts, applies current circuit precedent to your specific dischargeability theory, and generates a comprehensive, court-ready complaint meeting all FRBP requirements. The AI ensures proper jurisdictional allegations, heightened pleading particularity, element-by-element analysis, and timely filing within bankruptcy deadlines.
This workflow is applicable across multiple practice areas and use cases
Commercial litigation attorneys use dischargeability complaints when creditors pursue fraud-based claims against debtors who filed bankruptcy during ongoing commercial disputes.
Commercial creditors frequently need to except debts from discharge when business partners or customers file bankruptcy after fraudulent transactions, misrepresentations, or breach of fiduciary duty.
Lenders and financing attorneys use dischargeability complaints to protect loan obligations when borrowers file bankruptcy after obtaining credit through fraud or false financial statements.
Financial institutions and lenders regularly encounter situations where borrowers file bankruptcy, requiring adversary proceedings to establish that debts are non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(2) for fraud or false pretenses.
Financial services attorneys representing banks, credit unions, and financial institutions file dischargeability complaints to except debts arising from fraudulent loan applications or embezzlement.
Financial institutions frequently need to pursue adversary proceedings in bankruptcy court to protect their interests when debtors obtained credit through misrepresentation or committed financial fraud.
Employment attorneys use dischargeability complaints when former employees file bankruptcy to discharge debts arising from embezzlement, breach of fiduciary duty, or fraud against employers.
Employers often need to except employment-related debts from discharge under § 523(a)(4) for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, or § 523(a)(6) for willful and malicious injury.
Under Bankruptcy Rule 4007(c), complaints to determine dischargeability based on fraud or most other grounds must be filed within 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). This deadline is strictly enforced and can only be extended if a motion is filed before the deadline expires. Missing this deadline typically bars the creditor from objecting to discharge of the debt.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), incorporated by Bankruptcy Rule 7009, requires fraud allegations to be pled with particularity. You must specify the who, what, when, where, and how of each fraudulent statement or omission. This includes identifying the exact date and manner of communication, the specific false content, the debtor's knowledge of falsity, intent to deceive, the creditor's reliance, and resulting damages. Conclusory allegations or mere recitations of legal elements are insufficient.
Yes, you can and often should plead alternative theories of non-dischargeability in separate counts if the facts support multiple statutory exceptions under § 523. For example, the same conduct might support claims under § 523(a)(2)(A) for fraud, § 523(a)(4) for defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, and § 523(a)(6) for willful and malicious injury. Each count must independently satisfy all elements of that particular exception, and the theories should be factually consistent.
If the court grants your complaint and determines the debt is non-dischargeable, that specific debt survives the bankruptcy discharge and remains legally enforceable against the debtor after the bankruptcy case closes. You can pursue collection through normal state court remedies, including judgment enforcement, garnishment, and liens. The judgment of non-dischargeability is binding and prevents the debtor from discharging that debt in future bankruptcy filings under certain circumstances.
Yes, Bankruptcy Rule 7008 requires verification of complaints alleging fraud or other matters subject to Rule 9(b)'s heightened pleading standard. The plaintiff or an authorized corporate officer must sign a verification statement under penalty of perjury confirming they have read the complaint and believe the allegations to be true based on personal knowledge or information and belief. This verification must be included with the filed complaint and serves to deter frivolous fraud allegations.