In re Quigley, No. 12-12371 (Oct. 10, 2017)

After this case had been closed for some time, the Debtors filed a lawsuit against the Pages, among others, for violation of an agreement that licensed the Pages’ use of a trademark that had been transferred to the Debtors post-bankruptcy. In response, the Pages moved to reopen the case asserting that the Debtors misled the trustee by claiming that the trademark was worthless and by failing to disclose the license agreement, which at the time was held by one of the Debtors’ business entities. Because the essential facts were disclosed and discussed at the meeting of creditors and the Trustee chose not to pursue the potential asset during the bankruptcy case or after he learned of the Debtors’ post-bankruptcy lawsuit against the Pages, the Court denied the motion to reopen.

WL Cite: 584 B.R. 820 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2017)