Summary: Debtor executed a promissory note and Deed of Trust in favor of First Citizens in 2004, but since the loans inception made payments to (or through) Cenlar.  After the Debtor filed Chapter 13 in 2007,    Cenlar filed a proof of claim, including a copy of the note, but without any indorsement.  In 2008, the Debtor fell behind on payments and a consent order resolving such delinquency was entered, stating, among other things, that Cellar was the holder or servicer of the note.  In March of 2011, Residential Credit Solutions ("RCS") filed a

Summary: The complaint and anser both failed, in contravention of Rules 7008(a) and 7012(b), to state whether the proceeding was core or  non-core, and if non-core, where the parties consented to the bankruptcy court entering  final orders or judgments.  The Court held that, in light of Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct.

Summary: A few hours prior to a foreclosure sale, 15 parcels of real property were transferred to the Debtors by three corporations owed by the Debtors.  The Debtors shortly thereafter filed Chapter 11.  BB&T commenced an Adversary Proceeding seeking to avoid the transfers as fraudulent conveyances and because some were made ultra vires and brought a Motion for Summary Judgment. In determining whether a transfer was a fraudulent conveyance the court first turned to the non-exclusive list of factors found in N.C. Gen. Stat.

Summary: A commercial guarantee and Deed of Trust in the amount of $250,000.00 was executed by Prudential Investors, L.L.C., of which the Male Debtor was 50% owner.  The commercial guarantee defined the "guarantor" as the Male Debtor, but the Female Debtor also signed under the word "Guarantor."  At the same time, the Male Debtor also signed two $100,000.00 notes that included the words "personal guaranty" under the signature line on an addenda to the notes. The Male Debtor alleged that he had, in fact, forged his wife’s name to the commercial guarantee.  The

Summary: Following a foreclosure, appeal of the foreclosure to the North Carolin Court of Appeals (which was dismissed for failure by the homeowner to comply with deadlines), an unconsummated foreclosure bid by the homeowner's daughter, and two civil suits in state court, the Debtor eventually filed Chapter 13 (twice).  Not surprisingly, Wells Fargo had lost patience with the Debtor and sought not only relief from the automatic stay as to the Debtor, but also in rem relief against the real property itself under 11 U.S.C.

Abstract: This paper examines the contagion effect of residential foreclosures and finds strong evidence of a social interactions influence on default decisions where the interaction is based on neighbors' behavior in a previous period. Using a unique spatially explicit parcel level data set documenting residential foreclosures in Maryland for the years 2006-2009 and a highly localized neighborhood definition, based on 13 nearest neighbors, the authors find that a neighbor in foreclosure increases the hazard of additional defaults by as much as 28%.

Summary: After Mr.  Taylor and Ms.  Miller separated, they executed a deed transferring real property to Mr.  Taylor but providing that if Mr.  Taylor later sought to sell the property, Ms.  Miller would have a right of first refusal, allowing her to either match the sales price or pay $41,500.00, plus subsequent costs of repairs and improvements to the property.  In June of 2009, Mr.  Taylor wrote to Ms.  Miller asking her to forego this right of first refusal.  Ms.  Miller did not respond.  Later that month, Mr.  T

Abstract: This paper investigates whether homeowners respond strategically to news of mortgage modification programs.  The authors exploit plausibly exogenous variation in modification policy induced by U.S. state government lawsuits against Countrywide Financial Corporation, which agreed to offer modifications to seriously delinquent borrowers with subprime mortgages throughout the country.

Abstract: On March 4, 2011, the New York Times described a settlement ("settlement") proposed by a consortium of state attorneys general (AGs) to large mortgage servicers. The claims to be settled reportedly relate to failures to follow existing procedural rules relating to the foreclosure process. The settlement would make dramatic changes in those rules, and reportedly require a mortgage loan principal reduction program of $20 to 25 billion.

Summary:

Following an order denying the Debtor’s motion to dismiss, the Debtor sought certification of his appeal directly to the Court of Appeals, bypassing the District Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(B).  Direct certification is allowed under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(A) if the court before which the matter is pending determines:

(i) the . . . order . . . involves a question of law as to which there is no controlling decision of