The standard for defeating equitable disgorgement is lower than the proof required to fend off receipt of a fraudulent transfer.

The Madoff case makes more law: A claim against a bankrupt estate can’t be set off against liability for receipt of a fraudulent transfer because one arose before bankruptcy and the other arose after.

The fraudulent intent of an individual who controls a corporation can be imputed to the corporation itself, even if the board is unaware of fraud.

An alter ego may be of the same ilk as a partnership or agency, so there may be no inconsistency between the Fifth Circuit opinion and the Bartenwerfer concurrence.

Oregon Supreme Court allows substitution of a bankruptcy trustee as the real party in interest because denial would chiefly punish the debtor’s creditors.

A district judge in New York reversed the bankruptcy court, which had held that a Kuwaiti public pension fund was not entitled to sovereign immunity for having engaged in commercial activity.

The lawsuit was under federal law, not state law, even though Section 544(b)(1) incorporated state fraudulent transfer law.

Bankruptcy Judge Klinette H. Kindred declined to expand Bartenwerfer by imputing fraud or larceny when the debtor wasn’t a partner or agent.

Just because the debtor orchestrated a fraudulent transfer, the Seventh Circuit tells us there’s nothing for a trustee recover if there was no diminution of the estate.

A transferor’s fraudulent intent isn’t imputed to the transferee to make the transferee’s debt nondischargeable for ‘actual fraud.’