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, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: Dodeka, L.L.C. v. Cobb- Standard for Attorneys’ Fees in Consumer Rights Action

Summary: Plaintiff brought a complaint against Defendant for monies allegedly owed on a credit card.  Defendant answered and raised counterclaims, to which Plaintiff failed to reply.  Consequently,  default was entered on the counterclaims with $4,500.00 in actual damages, plus $17,912.11 in costs, including attorneys’ fees.  Defendant appealed, questioning, among other things, the reasonableness of the attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeal  held that the standard for reviewing an award of attorneys’ fees was that "the record must contain findings of
By Ed Boltz, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: In re Wilson- Failure to Enjoin Foreclosure Pending Appeal

Summary: The pro se Debtor attacked a foreclosure on several fronts, first appealing the Clerk of Court authorization of the foreclosure to the Superior Court and then to the Court of Appeals.  The Debtor did not file a motion to stay the foreclosure pending the appeal and the property was sold at auction. The Court of Appeals held that the foreclosure auction mooted the subsequent appeal, leaving nothing to be heard. For a copy of the opinion, please see:
By Ed Boltz, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: T-WOL Acquisition Co., Inc. v. ECDG South, L.L.C.: Judicial Estoppel following Failure to Disclose Asset in Bankruptcy

Summary: Plaintiff Harris did not disclose any ownership interest in T-WOL, which had been incorporated in 2000,  when he filed bankruptcy in 2001.  Following suit in 2009, the Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiff Harris should be judicially estopped from asserting ownership in T-WOL. The purpose of judicial estoppel is "to protect the integrity of the judicial process by prohibiting parties from deliberately changing positions according to the exigencies of the moment."  Whitacre P’Ship v.  Biosignia Inc., 358 N.C.
By Ed Boltz, 14 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re L.L.C Murphrey Co.- Revocation of Confirmation Order Denied

Summary: The Chapter 11 plan, confirmed in 2001,  provided that the liability of the guarantors was capped at the amount of the Recapitalized Debt.  The creditor, originally Wachovia, however, argued that this provision was impermissible and should not be given effect now. The bankruptcy court found that this argument was fallacious.  First, the terms of the confirmation order had been fully negotiated by a sophisticated creditor with an experienced attorney from a large law firm. That aside, pursuant to both A.H. Robins Company, Inc. v Mabey, 880 F.
By Ed Boltz, 14 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Silverdeer, L.L.C.- Validity of Judgment Lien against Personal Property

Summary: The Debtor was filed in an involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which was eventually dismissed.  The bankruptcy court, later affirmed by the district court, awarded the Debtor $24,678.41 in attorneys’ fees and costs. After the award was affirmed, however, BB&T a creditor, asserted that as a judgment creditor it was entitled to the money.  The bankruptcy court found to the contrary, holding that while a "judgment creditor acquires a lien on the judgment debtor’s real estate by docketing.
By Ed Boltz, 14 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Young- No Exemption by Slayer

Summary: Debtor was first found by a civil court to be the slayer of Michelle Young, his wife.  He later filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, claiming 401k accounts as exempt.  While the bankruptcy was pending, he was convicted of the first degree murder of Ms.  Young. First the Court found that the Debtor was, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 31A-3 (3)(a) and (b), as slayer to both the civil adjudication and the criminal conviction.  As such, he did own the 401k accounts as "[n]o person should be permitted to profit from his own wrong", Prudential Ins. Co v.
By Ed Boltz, 7 May, 2012

4th Circuit: Gilbert v. Residential Funding, L.L.C.- 3-Year Right of Rescission under TILA did not require commencement of enforcement suit

Summary:

The Debtors executed an adjustable rate mortgage note on May 5, 2006, and received several disclosures, including a Truth in Lending Disclosure Statement, a Notice of Right to Cancel, a Variable Rate Mortgage Program Disclosure, a HUD-1 Settlement Statement and a First Payment Letter.

By Ed Boltz, 7 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Adams- No Attorneys’ Fees for Filing a Notice of Mortgage Payment Change

Summary: Following shortly after the opinion by Judge Leonard in In re White (See:  http://ncbankruptcyexpert.com/?p=686), Judge Doub similarly held here that the attorney for the mortgage servicer had made no showing that the filing of Notice of Mortgage Payment Change required the assistance of an attorney. For a copy of the opinion, please see:
By Ed Boltz, 7 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Long- Sanctions for Violation of § 362 include Emotional Distress

Summary: Piedmont Equine Associates, Inc., and its debt collector, Madison Credit Bureau Associates, Inc.,  continued to contact the Debtors about payment of a debt, not only after notice of the bankruptcy,  but after it had filed a Proof of Claim.  The contacts included letters, telephone calls and direct contact by their daughter’s horse trainer. The Court found that Piedmont had violated 11usc 362 and that recovery for actual damages under § 362(k) included emotional distress.  Evidence of emotion distress "need not rise to the level necessary to prove
By Ed Boltz, 7 May, 2012

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re King- No Collateral Estoppel without Notice of the Action

Summary: Plaintiff in a non-dischargability action sought summary judgment based on judgment entered by Judge Jolly on August 17, 2009.  The Debtors/Defendants, however, produced the entire state court file, showing both that Judge Stephens had dismissed the action on May 19, 2009, and that there was nothing showing the Debtors/Defendants received notice of the litigation pending before Judge Jolly. Finding that the Debtors/Defendants had not had "an adequate opportunity or incentive to obtain a full and fair adjudication in the initial action."  Metropolitan H

Pagination

  • First page
  • Previous page
  • …
  • Page 85
  • Page 86
  • Page 87
  • Page 88
  • Page 89
  • …
  • 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