A trial was held on September 22, 1997. The parties filed post-trial briefs on legal issues and to spell out damages. Pursuant to FRBP 7052, incorporating FRCP  52, the court enters its findings of fact (¶¶ 1-7) and conclusions of law (¶¶ 8-13).

FINDINGS OF FACT -

1. Background Facts -

1.1. Plaintiff, Latha Subramanian, was born in India, educated and 5 ABR 112      raised in Africa, and arrived in the United States after receiving her medical degree. Notwithstanding her advanced professional decree, she was relatively unsophisticated in such social situations as dating. She is a Brahman, and it was expected that her family would play a major role in finding her a suitable husband. The Brahman caste is one of the higher castes in India.

1.2. Sanjay Talwar, the defendant and debtor, was born in India, but raised during his high school years in Anchorage, Alaska. He is of a lower caste than Latha. The evidence was unclear about his educational background, but his occupational prospects were much more limited than Latha's.

1.3. The parties met in Detroit, Michigan, in the 1970s, when Sanjay was engaged in post-secondary education and Latha was a medical intern. The parties became very close, developed a close relationship and spent a lot of time together. Though the relationship was romantic, it was not sexual. Sanjay told Latha that he wanted to marry her.

1.4. Eventually, Sanjay returned to Anchorage. Shortly after, in about 1988, Latha came to Anchorage as a specialist in cancer care.

1.5. In Anchorage, Latha and Sanjay maintained a romantic relationship. However, in December 1989, notwithstanding his feelings for Latha and his professions of love for her, Sanjay was married to his present wife, Molina Talwar, while on a short vacation in India. The marriage was a family-arranged event, and apparently something done without a lot of advance notice to Sanjay.

1.6. Sanjay and Molina met each other about a week before they 5 ABR 113      were married. Molina Talwar is the niece of Sanjay's brother-in-law, Dr. Harbir Making, of Anchorage.

1.7. After the marriage, Sanjay returned to Alaska. Latha learned of the marriage in December 1989, or early 1990. Sanja continued to see Latha socially, and he told Molina that he was doing so. On one or two occasions, he spent three consecutive days at Latha's home, and he overnighted at her home on other occasions as well. There were also periods of separation from his wife.

1.8. Sanja told Latha he did not love Molina. Although Latha was extremely upset that Sanjay had married someone else, Sanjay persisted in telling Latha that he still wanted to marry her. Sanjay told Latha that his marriage was the result of family pressure within the family culture, and that he was not sleeping with his wife.

2. Loans -

  

Date	Check No.	Amount	Comment
04/16/90	784	$675.00
07/23/90	811	$990.00
08/08/90	814	$311.00
09/04/90	826	$1,100.00
09/07/90	829	$1,100.00
10/05/90	846	$1,018.00
10/19/90	853	$400.00
10/31/90	856	$825.00
5 ABR 114      01/07/92	996	$1,500.00
07/16/92	1052	$2,000.00
Subtotal		$9,919.00	Allowable § 523(a)(2)(A) damages
11/93			Latha learned Sanjay was with wife
01/16/94	1219	$750.00	No justifiable reliance
04/11/94	1264	$500.00	No justifiable reliance
Total		$11,169.00

2.2. At the time the loans were made, Sanjay misrepresented his intent to repay the loans and his intent to divorce Molina and marry Latha. He never intended to do either although he protested otherwise, and even discussed divorcing Molina.

2.3. Latha was unsophisticated in romantic relationships and was justified in relying on Sanjay's professions of love and prospect of one day marrying. Sanjay used this naivety to procure the loans. Sanjay misrepresented his intentions to get the loans, and the reliance on his misrepresentations were the proximate cause of the loss to Latha. Sanjay never intended to repay these sums, even from the inception of the loans.

2.4. Nonetheless, she was not justified in relying on Sanjay's protestations of love after she learned in November 1993, that Sanja was indeed living with his wife and that Molina was pregnant. These exclude the final two payments on the table and establish the amount obtained by misrepresentation, justifiably relied on as $9,919, plus interest.

3. Ownership of and Damages Related to Real Property -

3.1. In July 1990, Sanjay convinced Latha to purchase a 4-plex at Lot 7, Block 3, O.H. Fast Subdivision, Plat P-156, Anchorage Recording District, Alaska. The sale closed in October 1990. She was reluctant, but agreed to do so. 5 ABR 115      The 4-plex was a good investment according to Sanjay. Title was taken in their joint names, although the funds had all or mostly been provided by Latha for the acquisition, including a down payment and various closing costs and inspection fees. See, Plaintiff's Exhibits 1-13.

3.2. Sanjay moved into one of the 4-plex apartments and managed the units. He paid no rent. It had a rental value of about $650 per month, and Sanja lived there about 55 months. Unbeknownst to Latha, he moved Molina in too. Latha found out in about November 1993, and became irate.

3.3. The 4-plex did not make money. Latha relies on a summary Sanjay did for the purposes of the state court action which preceded these adversary proceedings to establish damages and poor management. As a result of either poor management or an uneconomical property, Latha had to refinance in November 1994, after she forced Sanjay to move out when she learned that Molina was living in the 4-plex with Sanjay. See, Plaintiff's Exhibits 14-15.

3.4. The evidence was too sparse to award damages to Latha for mismanagement as a nondischargeable debt. There is insufficient evidence to establish nondischargeability for any damages caused by Sanjay's mismanagement. I do not find that such mismanagement was willful or malicious, the result of fraud or misrepresentation, or a breach of a fiduciary duty.

3.5. At the trial, Sanjay agreed that full legal and equitable title to the real property and personal property related to the 4-plex should vest in Latha. The trustee has agreed to be a nominal party and to the extent the court awarded 5 ABR 116      ownership to Latha, to make no claims to title on behalf of the bankruptcy estate.

4. Damages Resulting from Purchase of Volvo -

4.1. About four years after his marriage in 1989, Sanjay appeared at Latha's medical office with a new Volvo automobile, wrapped in red ribbon, and a birthday cake. He said he wanted to cheer her up, and he still had feelings for her. He presented the Volvo as a birthday present from him to her.

4.2. Sanjay had purchased the Volvo using a check from Latha's bank account at the Alaska USA Federal Credit Union. The amount of the check, used for the down payment, was $7,000. The money was originally from Latha, herself. She gave Sanjay a blank check, and he inserted $8,000 and kept $1,000 for himself.

4.3. After the down payment was made, Sanjay asked Latha to make the monthly payments for the Volvo at Alaska USA Federal Credit Union, which she did. The loan had been taken out by Sanjay, and he became concerned that his name was on the car loan and, in November 1994, he asked Latha to refinance the loan and "get (him) out of it."

4.4. Latha agreed to do so, provided that Sanjay quitclaim in writing his interest in a certain 4-plex acquired in Anchorage, the paper work having reflected that both Latha and Sanjay had an interest in that property despite his lack of financial contributions and the original intention. Sanjay agreed to do this, and so Latha refinanced the Volvo, signing documents presented to her for the purpose by Sanjay.

5 ABR 117      4.5. The facts about why Latha allowed Sanjay such open access to her account at this time are obscure. Nonetheless, Latha has the Volvo, which she does not use because of the painful memories.

4.6. Latha apparently does not seek nondischargeability for the $1,000 amount over and above the Volvo down payment.

4.7. From these confused facts, I do not find that there are any nondischargeable damages arising from willful or malicious conduct, misrepresentation, and/or breach of fiduciary duty with respect to the Volvo, especially given the agreement to turn title to the real property over to Latha.

5. Damages for Snowplow Truck and Blade -

5.1. At Sanjay's request, Latha funded the purchase of a truck and snowplow blade. The truck and blade were to be used to plow the 4-plex and any other snowplow jobs Sanjay could get. The parties were to be in business together, with Latha providing the funding. The down payment for the truck to Alaska Sales & Service was $4,000 in September 1990 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 41). The snowplow cost $2,998 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 47).

5.2. Sanjay, by his own admission was an inept snowplow operator.

5.3. He decided to use the truck and blade on about March 22, 1993, to trade for a 1992 Toyota Camry (Plaintiff's Exhibit 49). Although he told Latha he was going to do so, he kept the part of the equity in the snowplow truck and blade, which should have gone back to Latha. This was done without justification and amounts to a conversion of Latha's property. Latha seeks damages in the 5 ABR 118      amount of $4,000 for the truck down payment and $2,998 for the snowplow blade. See, Post-Trial Brief of Latha Subramanian, filed September 29, 1997, at Attachment 1. The damages, however, are the value of the items claimed by Latha as damages, reduced to reflect the value at the time of the conversion:

Value of snowplow truck (Exhibit 42) in 09/90		$19,965.00
Value of snowplow (Exhibit 47) in 09/90		2,998.00
Total value in 09/90		$22,963.00
Trade-in value of truck and plow in 03/93 (Exb 49)		$11,523.08
Ratio of value at trade-in ($11,523.08/$22,963)		50%
Damages allowed for truck (50% of $4,000)		$2,000.00
Damages allowed for plow (50% of $2998, rounded)		$1,500.00
Total Damages as of 03/22/93		$3,500.00