Summary: Effective February 23, 2011, federal regulations may have settled the question about whether federal benefits, including Social Security and VA benefits, that are exempt from garnishment or execution by judgment creditors and bankruptcy trustees retain that exempt status if commingled with other non-exempt funds. 31 C.F.R. § 212.3 applies to garnishment, which is defined to include “execution, levy, attachment, garnishment or other legal process” (Emphasis added), which should include actions by a bankruptcy trustee.

Debt in America Abstract: Debt can be constructive, allowing people to build equity in homes or finance education, but it can also burden families into the future. Total debt is driven by mortgage debt; both are highly concentrated in high-cost housing markets, mostly along the coasts. Among Americans with a credit file, average total debt was $53,850 in 2013, but was substantially higher for people with a mortgage ($209,768) than people without a mortgage ($11,592). Non-mortgage debt, in contrast, is more spatially dispersed.

Summary: Fritz closed his account with Duke Energy when he moved, but was one week late in paying the final bill, so it was referred to a debt collector. He did pay the balance to Duke Energy, who applied the amount to the balance on his new utility bill. The debt collector was not informed of the payment and two months later, reported Fritz as delinquent to the three major credit bureaus, resulting in a 77 point decline in his credit score. Fritz brought suit against Duke Energy (as well as the debt collector under other bases) under N.C.G.S.

Summary: As evidence of the insolvency of the Debtor in support of a long-running preference action, the Trustee sought to introduce Affidavits from his paralegal, from the Director of Financial Services of one of the Debtor’s largest creditors, from the Examiner appointed in the case and from himself.

Summary: Prior to filing bankruptcy, the Meabons first consulted with an attorney who informed them that they would need to disclose, as an asset in his bankruptcy schedules, Richard Meabon’s interest in a trust. As a result of the first attorney’s advice, the Meabons chose to file with another attorney, to whom they did not disclose the existence of the trust. After filing Chapter 7 without disclosure of the trust either in their petition or at the §341 Meeting of Creditors, the deadline to object to discharge passed on June 1, 2010.

Summary: Plaintiffs brought suit against, among other, lenders that had financed mortgage loans for the development of investment properties, alleging that the appraisals conducted, which unanimously and uniformly valued real property lots, regardless of specific qualities or locations, for $500,000, the exact minimum to support the mortgage lender’s underwriting requirements, constituted both negligent underwriting and also an unfair trade practice. Following shortly after the Dallaire opinion from the North Carolina Supreme Court (see:

Summary: Corporate Debtor Abbington Partners, filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy without representation by counsel. It had previously a bankruptcy in Massachusetts, which had been dismissed for lack of attorney representation. Reiterating that “[i]t has been the law for the better part of two centuries . . . that a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel.” In re Tamojira, Inc., 20 F. App’x 133, 133-34 (4th Cir.

Summary: Creditor, Two Olives, Inc., sought denial of the debtors’ discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(2)(A) , asserting that“the debtor, with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor . . . has permitted to be transferred . . .

Summary: Siblings, Townsend and Simmons owned real property as tenants in common. Townsend brought suit seeking a partition sale of the property, naming Simmons the lienholder, Citimortgage and the City of Greensboro, as defendants. After the trial court found that due to the size and nature of the property actual partition of the property could not be made without injury to the parties and ordered a partition sale.

Summary: A quit claim deed, recorded with the Buncombe Register of Deeds on May 14, 2009, was blank as to the legal description and only included the handwritten entry “Parcel #960704498200000.”. On April 29, 2010, a “Affidavit of Correction” was recorded including the legal metes and bounds description. The Court of Appeals held that the quit claim deed was void as it inadequately described the property, holding that a tax PIN alone was insufficient. The Court distinguished Fisher v. Town of Nags Head, ___ N.C. App.