Tag: fixture

Bankr. W.D.N.C.: In re Hudgins- Secured Status of Fixture versus Consumer Good

Summary:

Lendmark financed the purchase and installation of an HVAC unit for Ms. Hudgins’ home. All parties agreed that the HVAC unit was a “consumer good” as defined by N.C.G.S. § 25-9-102, that Lendmark held an automatically perfected purchase money security interest in the HVAC as chattel pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 25-9-309(1) and that Lendmark did not record a fixture filing.

The Trustee argued that without the fixture filing Lendmark’s security interest fell to the hypothetical judgment lien creditor status of bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 544. Lendmark countered that its perfected lien against the HVAC as a consumer good was not lost when it became a fixture.… Read More

Tagged with: , , ,

Bankr. M.D.N.C.: In re Canuto- Sua Sponte Summary Judgment Denying Strip-Off based on Fixture Filing

Summary:

The Debtors sought to strip-off the lien held by PSNC Energy for a HVAC unit as wholly unsecured based on the value of the real property. Without any answer by PSNC, the Court sua sponte held that based on the record, consisting primarily of the Proof of Claim filed by PSNC, that A UCC-1 fixture filing had been recorded within 20 days of installation of the HVAC unit and was, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 25-9-334(d), entitled to a first priority, perfected purchase money security interest in the HVAC.

For a copy of the opinion, please see:

Canuto- Sua Sponte Summary Judgment Denying Strip-Off based on Fixture Filing Read More

Tagged with: , , ,

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Eng – Impairment of De Minimus Class; Nature as a Fixture

Summary:

The Debtor purchased two gas stations, against which Petromax held Deeds of Trust, including against fixtures, in the amount of more than $2.4 million. Upon filing Chapter 11, the Debtor valued the gas stations at $1.3 million. The Debtor’s second proposed plan had eight classes of claims, but Class 7, which consisted of only $5,760.52 in unsecured claims, was the sole impaired class in favor of the plan, with the City of Greenville, holding a claim for $915.42, being the lone claimant to vote. The impairment to Class 7 was a 20 month delay in payment.

While a debtor may proceed to confirmation even in the absence of accepting ballots from all impaired classes pursuant to § 1129(b)(1) if, among other things, at least one impaired class of claims accepts the plan, and the remaining requirements of § 1129(a) are met, “there must be some other properly classified group that is also hurt and nonetheless favors the plan.” In re 266 Washington Associates, 141 B.R.… Read More

Tagged with: , , ,
Top