⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel hears a dispute between a married couple, the Kims, and their creditor, Vickers Holding and Finance. It began with a business loan to Mr. Kim, followed by litigation in the Netherlands and California judgment collection. The fight carried into bankruptcy, where Vickers asked the court to deny the Kims a discharge and to keep particular debts from being discharged. A discharge releases the debtor from covered debts; denying discharge is broader than excluding one particular debt. The dispute centers on financial disclosure: whether the Kims supplied adequate records showing what happened to the money. Section seven twenty-seven, ay three, permits denial for failing to keep records needed to understand the debtor's finances, unless the failure was justified in the circumstances. Section five twenty-three, ay six, instead excepts a particular debt for willful and malicious injury. The panel considers what could be decided on summary judgment: a ruling without trial when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the law entitles one side to win. You will also hear issue preclusion: whether a question actually resolved in earlier state-court proceedings binds the bankruptcy court. That does not automatically establish every requirement for denying discharge.

In re Kim (No. 26-1071) — U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 15, 2026.