Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): business, property, or contract tort claims could be withdrawn from the bankruptcy system, contrary to the intent of Congress. Id. at 161. After distinguishing the plaintiffs’ sexual harassment claims from other workplace claims that might constitute a financial, business, or property torts, the Ice Cream Liquidation court concluded that such claims fell within Section 157(b)(5). Id. at 162-63. After considering the three approaches as to what constitutes a “personal injury tort claim,” this Court concludes that the middle ground is the correct approach. Using this approach, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs’ defamation claims constitute personal injury tort claims within the meaning of Section 157(b)(5). See Control Center, L.L.C. v. Lauer, 288 B.R. 269, 279, 286 (M.D.Fla.2002) (<HOLDING>); Hansen, 164 B.R. at 486 (holding that a 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that a defamation claim is a personal injury tort claim (B) holding that a libel claim is not a personal injury tort claim (C) holding that an embezzlement claim is not a personal injury tort claim (D) holding that a libel claim is a personal injury tort claim (E) holding that a claim for violation of the fair debt collection practices act is not a personal injury tort claim
Output (English): holding that an embezzlement claim is not a personal injury tort claim