Badovick v. Greenspan, 2011 Ohio 3262

Plaintiff was awarded a 2006 judgment against Greenspan; Greenspan bankruptcy followed in 2007 listing plaintiff as unsecured creditor.
Fraudulent transfer of $120,000 from Greenspan to Lantsberg occurred in July 2006, with title to the property held by FGAG, a Lantsberg/Greenspans LLC.
Bankruptcy trustee proposed an $80,000 settlement of the fraudulent conveyance claims in 2007; plaintiff did not oppose.
Bankruptcy court ordered the $80,000 settlement and released Lantsberg from further claims; Greenspans received a discharge in 2007.
Plaintiff filed later state-court claims for fraudulent conveyance and related causes of action; bankruptcy court later found the suit sought to collect a discharged debt and remanded to state court.
Court ultimately held the state-law claims were barred by res judicata because plaintiff, Lantsberg, and FGAG were in privity and part of the bankruptcy proceeding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars the suit against Lantsberg and FGAG	Badovick argues not all parties to bankruptcy.	Lantsberg/FGAG contend privity and settlement bar suit.	Yes; res judicata bars the claims.

Federated Mgt. Co. v. Latham & Watkins, 138 Ohio App.3d 815 (2000) (expands ‘party’ to include creditors in bankruptcy for res judicata)
Sanders Confectionery Prods., Inc. v. Heller Fin., Inc., 973 F.2d 474 (6th Cir. 1992) (creditors and those in privity are parties to bankruptcy action for res judicata)
Countywide Petroleum Co. v. Huntington Capital Invest. Co., 2010-Ohio-155 (Ohio App.) (released parties under a bankruptcy settlement bar subsequent claims)
Sanders Confectionery Prods. v. Heller Fin., Inc., 973 F.2d 481 (6th Cir. 1992) (privity extended to FGAG via ownership and control relationships)
Jungkunz v. Fifth Third Bank, 99 Ohio App.3d 148 (1994) (elements of res judicata in Ohio are satisfied when final judgment on merits exists and same parties)