This brief is concerned with the Petitioner’s misinterpretation of §523(a)(2) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §101, et seq., which wrongly maintains that a false oral statement describing a single asset gives rise to a non-dischargeable debt. This brief shows Congress understood that §523(a)(2) simply re-enacted statutory language already having a completely settled understanding that a statement about a single asset was a “statement respecting financial condition” which must be in writing in order to give rise to a nondischargeable debt. This brief also submits that even if, arguendo, Petitioner were correct that a statement respecting financial condition must refer to overall financial condition, Respondent gave statements about his overall financial condition because they amounted to a claim that he was solvent in the equity sense; i.e., able to pay his debts
