Skip to main content
Home

Main navigation

  • NC Bankruptcy Cases
    • Eastern District
    • Middle District
    • Western District
  • NC Courts
    • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
    • NC Court of Appeals
    • NC Business Court
    • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • Federal Cases
  • Law Reviews & Studies
    • Book Reviews
  • NC Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
User account menu
  • Log in
By Ed Boltz, 2 December, 2011

H.R. 2192: National Guard and Reservist Debt Relief Extension Act of 2011

Last night, the Senate passed by unanimous consent a bill (HR 2192) that would renew an exemption in  11 USC § 707(b)(2)(D) for reservists and National Guard members from Chapter 7 bankruptcy means-testing requirements. The bill would amend a 2008 law to make reservists and Guard members that have served on active duty or homeland defenses for at least 90 days since Sept. 11, 2001 eligible for the exemption through 2015. The bill now goes to the President where it is expected to be signed into law.
By Ed Boltz, 30 November, 2011

4th Circuit: McDow v. Dudley- Denial of Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 707(b) is an Appealable Final Order

Summary: The Debtors filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2008.  Following a Motion to convert or dismiss the case filed by the Chapter 13 Trustee, the Debtors voluntarily converted to Chapter 7.  The U.S. Trustee sought dismissal of the case pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
By Ed Boltz, 30 November, 2011

H.R. 2192: National Guard and Reservist Debt Relief Extension Act of 2011

Summary: In a striking example of bi-partisan support,  the House of Representative passed the H.R.  2192 by a vote of 407-1.  This bill would renew the National  Guard and Reservist Debt Relief Act   ("NGARDRA") for an additional 4 years. First enacted in 2008, NGARDRA relieves National Guard and Reserve service members of many of the onerous provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, by providing that if such a service member found him or herself in the unfortunate position of needing to file bankruptcy in the 18-months after returning from active duty
By Ed Boltz, 28 November, 2011

Bankr. EDNC: Robinson- Blank Indorsement of Note

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
By Ed Boltz, 28 November, 2011

Bankr. EDNC: New Bern Riverfront v. Weaver Cooke- No Implied Consent to Non-Core Jurisdiction

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.
By Ed Boltz, 21 November, 2011

Bankr. EDNC: BB&T v. Murray- Avoidance of Fraudulent Conveyance; Ultra Vires Acts

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.
By Ed Boltz, 21 November, 2011

Bankr. EDNC: In re Sisler- Burden of Proof in Forgery; Requirements in establishing personal guarantee

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
By Ed Boltz, 21 November, 2011

Bankr. EDNC: In re Brown- In rem Relief from Automatic Stay

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.
By Ed Boltz, 19 November, 2011

Law Review: Towe & Hawley- The Contagion Effect of Neighboring Foreclosures

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%.
By Ed Boltz, 19 November, 2011

NC Court of Appeals: Taylor v. Miller- Validity of Right of First Refusal in a Deed

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

Pagination

  • First page
  • Previous page
  • …
  • Page 91
  • Page 92
  • Page 93
  • Page 94
  • Page 95
  • …
  • Next page
  • Last page
Drupal blog posts

About Us

Mountain View The purpose of the NC Bankruptcy Expert blog is to provide legal professionals with a consolidated resource for updates and case summaries about issues and decisions affecting bankruptcy, foreclosures, mortgages, and debt collection.

 
Lawyer Edward Boltz | Top Attorney Chapter 7

NC Bankruptcy Expert FREE Consultation

We Offer A Free Bankruptcy Consultation which has helped over 70,000 North Carolina families. We serve the entire state of North Carolina.

Proud Member of:












Categories

  • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Book Reviews
  • District Courts
  • Eastern District
  • Ed Boltz: Bankruptcy Attorney
  • Federal Cases
  • Forms
  • Home
  • Law Reviews & Studies
  • Middle District
  • Mortgage Modification Mediation Documents
  • NC Business Court
  • NC Court of Appeals
  • NC Courts
  • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • News
  • North Carolina Bankruptcy Cases
  • North Carolina District Court Cases
  • North Carolina Exemptions Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
  • Student Loan Options and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
  • Western District
RSS feed
v. 1.2.2, © 2013-2025 ncbankruptcyexpert.com, all rights reserved. Follow @edboltz