In this unpublished October 15, 2025, decision, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the rulings of the Bankruptcy Court and the Eastern District of Virginia in a messy dispute arising from the dissolution of a small limousine company, All American Black Car Service, Inc. (“AABCS”). The case reads like a familiar tale of closely-held corporate dissolution gone awry—complete with COVID-era losses, unwritten understandings, and shareholder distrust—transposed into the bankruptcy context.
In Harrington v. Laney (COA24-1071, filed October 15, 2025), Chief Judge Dillon, joined by Judges Murry and Freeman, reversed a Superior Court verdict that had invalidated a deed executed under a power of attorney, holding instead that the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations.
In In re Joiner, Case No. 25-30396 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. Oct. 2 2025) (Judge Ashley Austin Edwards), the court addressed the intersection between Subchapter V’s debtor-friendly lien modification authority under § 1190(3) and a creditor’s long-standing right under § 1111(b)(2) to elect to have an undersecured claim treated as fully secured.
In Shaf International, Inc. v. Mohammed (W.D.N.C. Sept. 22, 2025), Judge Reidinger affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s grant of summary judgment to the debtor, holding that a single creditor lacks standing to assert fiduciary duty claims against the officer of an insolvent corporation where the injury alleged is common to all creditors.
Judge Schroeder’s September 30, 2025 portrait of the property report as a CRA in Joyce v. First American Mortgage Solutions, LLC (No. 1:23-cv-1069) denied the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, allowing a Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) claim to proceed where a “Property Report” combined another consumer’s judgments with the plaintiff’s file and was then used by a lender to deny him a loan.
In this sequel to Keller v. Experian I, 2024 WL 1349607 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 30, 2024), Judge Thomas Schroeder once again dismissed Eric Keller’s Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) suit against Experian—this time for lack of Article III standing rather than for failure to state a claim.
