Summary:
The Debtor filed Chapter 13, during which Friedman’s Jewelers filed a Proof of Claim, asserting that it was secured in the amount of $300.00 and unsecured for the balance. The Debtor subsequently converted to Chapter 7, then re-converted to Chapter 13, eventually confirming a plan treating Friedman’s as secured in the amount of $300.00.
Friedman’s itself filed bankruptcy and its assets were liquidated, with the Debtor’s account being purchased by Merchant’s Acquisition Group, L.L.C. (MAG). MAG retained BRM Recovery Services to collect on this accou
Summary:
Deluxe Cleaners originally filed Chapter 11 in the Eastern District of North Carolina, but venue was shortly thereafter transferred to the Middle District of North Carolina. A related bankruptcy, filed by the Parks (who owned Deluxe Cleaners) was filed in the Eastern District of North Carolina. Thus began a cross-district tangle.
Prior to the filing of either bankruptcy, Deluxe Cleaners and the Parks obtained a judgment against Forrest Investment Group. As part of the Deluxe Cleaners bankruptcy, assets were sold to Forrest Investment and this
In 2004, Ms. Willis signed a will, stating that if she conveyed her residence to her son, Eddie, before her death, that it was her wish that if he sold the property, he divide the proceeds with his brother, Anthony. Subsequently, Ms. Willis transferred a remainder interest in the the residence to Eddie, but did not include any reversionary interest. Eddie then died intestate and Ms. Willis sought to reform the Deed to prevent the property from passing to Eddie’s children, arguing that the Deed to Eddie was a unila
This paper looks at the extent that differences in foreclosure and bankruptcy laws can jointly explain variation in default rates across states. The author finds that more generous homestead exemptions raise the cost of unsecured borrowing. Households in states with high exemptions therefore hold less unsecured and more mortgage debt compared to low exemption states, which leads to lower bankruptcy rates but higher foreclosure rates.
Answer a Complaint filed by Wells Fargo in North Carolina Superior Court, Stonebridge asserted several counterclaims. When Stonebridge later filed Chapter 11, the state court action was removed to bankruptcy court. Following the heightened pleading standards of Iqbal/Twombley, Wells Fargo sought dismissal of the counterclaims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failing to state claims for relief that were facially plausible. Stonebridge argued that the more permissive North Carolina pleading standards sho
Summary:
In a dispute regarding a failed real estate development, Stonebridge asserted a breach of contract claim. In response, NVR argued that a liquidated damages provision limited its liability for damages. The Bankruptcy Court found that Stonebridge could not complain that a negotiated liquidated damages provision was insufficient or invalid. The Bankruptcy Court also rejected the assertion by Stonebridge that NVR was required to indemnify economic damages, finding that the contract between the parties required indemnification of "damage to property and
The Debtor acquired a piece of real property in 2001 solely in his name. In 2007, three months after the Plaintiff/Creditor file a lawsuit against the Debtor, the Debtor transferred the property to himself and his wife as Tenants by the Entireties. Four months later, the Debtor filed Chapter 7.
The Plaintiff brought an action against the Debtor under 11 U.S.C.
After a very tortured procedural history, the summary of which runs until the tenth page and includes two removal to the federal district court for the EDNC and the involvement in class action cases decided by the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDA) did not preempt North Carolina law regarding fees charged in connection with a loan, rejecting (as had the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals) the argument that limitations on interest were preempted as the term "interest" cou
Pete Wall Plumbing (PWP) sought to enforce its materialmen's lien against property developed by Sandra Anderson Builders (SAB), in conjuction with Carolina Bank and the Greensboro Housing Authority.
Due to the multiparty nature of a development, SAB was both an owner of the properties under Chapter 44A, Article 2, Part 1, by virtue of the Subleases, see N.C. Gen. Stat.
