13bk1431, 13ap1431
Plaintiffs filed an adversary complaint seeking loans it made to Debtor nondischargeable under 523(a). Plaintiffs also sought to pierce the corporate veil to make Debtor personally liable. The court found Dr. Siragusa’s claim dischargeable because he filed his complaint beyond Illinois’ five-year statute of limitations for fraud claims. Because piercing the corporate veil attaches to the substantive claim and is not itself an independent claim, that was also time barred. As to Dana Siragusa and Robert Joseph Siragusa, the court found the loans nondischargeable under the receipt benefit theory whereby a Debtor can be held liable if he benefits from a fraud committed. The court will hold a status hearing to determine damages for Dana and Robert Joseph Siragusa.