Restitution
front page

What's new?

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

In [2000] R.L.R. 189, I have argued at 201-5 that the casino had furnished valuable consideration and at 215 that, if it had not, equitable tracing was the only appropriate remedy for the casino's innocent receipt of the proceeds of Cass's breach of his fiduciary duty. I believe the argument to support the "Original Messages" below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Allan Axelrod
Date: 15 December 2000 17:20
Subject: Re: [RDG:] Cass (Trustee in Bankruptcy) v. Karpnale?

Under a US statute called something like the 'religious liberty' act, good-faith charitable gifts by an insolvent are not avoidable. A court able to describe a loss to a casino as a 'gift' should have little trouble recognizing a casino as a 'charity'.

-----Original Message-----
From: Worthington,S
Date: 15 December 2000 18:25
Subject: Re: [RDG:] Cass (Trustee in Bankruptcy) v. Karpnale?

Although Cass obtains legal title from the bank, surely he holds the funds on trust for his defrauded partners (partnership/fiduciary law), so his trustee in bankruptcy could not distribute the funds to Cass's creditors ... nor reclaim them from the Playboy Club.