Opinion ID: 3065362
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Malicious Injury

Text: [6] “A malicious injury involves (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse.” Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich), 238 F.3d 1202, 1209 (9th Cir. 2001) (internal citations omitted). Malice may be inferred based on the nature of the wrongful act. See Transamerica Commercial Fin. Corp. v. Littleton (In re Littleton), 942 F.2d 551, 554 (9th Cir. 1991).7 To infer malice, however, it must first be established that the conversion was willful. See Thiara, 285 B.R. at 434. 7 The Supreme Court in Geiger did not address the malicious prong of section 523(a)(6). The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for this Circuit has 630 IN THE MATTER OF ORMSBY In this case, Ormsby knew that FATCO’s injury was substantially certain to occur as a result of his conduct. Ormsby additionally knew the legal way to obtain access to the title plants was to purchase rights. The state court found FATCO suffered an injury as a result of this use, and Ormsby has offered no just cause or excuse for his conduct.8 Moreover, in granting attorney’s fees, the state court found the misappropriation was willful and malicious. [7] Based on these facts found by the state court, Ormsby’s conduct meets both the willful and malicious prongs of section 523(a)(6); accordingly, we affirm the nondischargeability of the judgment.