Blog posts | Your North Carolina Bankruptcy Expert

By Ed Boltz, 9 October, 2018

W.D.N.C.: Hinkle v. Experian Information Systems & E.D.N.C.: Danehy v. Transunion- Motion to Dismiss FCRA Complaint for Failure to Provide Consumer File

Summary:

In two nearly identical cases, pro se consumers brought suit pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681g(a)(1), alleging that Experian Information Systems (“EIS”)and/or Transunion were credit reporting agencies under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and that both had, despite specific requests, only provided copies of their credit report and not their entire credit file, based on a belief that information regarding credit reporting hacks and identify disclosures were contain in the more complete file. In both cases the defendants brought M

By Ed Boltz, 8 October, 2018

Bankr. M.D.N.C.: In re Randle- Default Judgment for Violation of Automatic Stay

Summary:

The Randles fell behind on their car payments and Saga Auto Sales repossessed the Randles’ 2011 Cadillac Escalade. Upon payment of $2,100, Saga returned the vehicle on December 2, 2017. With their next payment due on December 9, 2017, the Randles filed Chapter 13 on December 8, 2017. Saga again repossessed the vehicle on December 10, 2018, also taking possession of Ms.

By Ed Boltz, 8 October, 2018

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: In re Ayodele- Conduit Mortgage Payment Required

Summary:

Mr.

By Ed Boltz, 5 October, 2018

Bankr. M.D.N.C: Northen v. MDC- Related to Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Summary:

On remand from the 4th Circuit, where Jason McDonald and MDC first raised the issue of subject matter jurisdiction, the bankruptcy court held that the actual debtor in this case held an ownership interest in MDC, such was, even under the broad “related to” jurisdiction, insufficient to allow the bankruptcy court to determine what assets were owned by that corporate entity. Otherwise:

Under such an expansive interpretation of “related to” jurisdiction, if a debtor owned a single share of a corporation

By Ed Boltz, 5 October, 2018

Bankr. M.D.N.C.: In re Miles- Untimely Objection to Venue

Summary:

Even though the Debtors admitted that they did not meet th venue requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1408, the bankruptcy court held that Rule 1014 required dismissal or transfer of a case filed in an improper district only on the filing of “timely” objection by a party in interest. Here, First New York Federal Credit Union did not object to venue until after the §341 Meeting of Creditors, payments had been collected through wage garnishment, and a proposed plan was pending, and then only on the 2nd to last day to object to Confir

By Ed Boltz, 5 October, 2018

Bankr. W.D.N.C: Smith v. Smith- Equitable Distribution Award or Domestic Support Obligation

Summary:

Following a trial (which the bankruptcy court described as more akin to a Summary Judgment Hearing), which was preceded by what can almost described as a remand by the bankruptcy court to the state domestic court to clarify the nature of its award of 50% of the Debtor’s retirement to his ex-wife, the bankruptcy court held that such award was not equitable distribution, which would have been dischargable in the Debtor’s Chapter 13, but a non-dischargable domestic support obligation.

The bankruptcy court applied a

By Ed Boltz, 4 October, 2018

M.D.N.C.: Koepplinger v. Seterus- FDCPA Violation for Threat to Accelerate Mortgage

Summary:

Koepplinger, as a putative class representative, alleged that Seterus would send North Carolina residents who were more than 45 day delinquent on mortgage payments its “NC Final Letter”, which stated, in pertinent part, that:

“If full payment of the default amount is not received by us . . .

By Ed Boltz, 4 October, 2018

N.C. Ct. of Appeals: In re Frucella- Lost Mortgage Note

Summary: The Frucellas purchased a home with a mortgage note from The Lotham & Nettleton Co. In 1985. In 1997, a Notice of Substitution of Trustee was filed providing, among other things, that Crestart Bank was the holder of the note.

By Ed Boltz, 4 October, 2018

Law Review: Persad, Govind-Bankruptcy Beyond Status Maintenance

Abstract: This Article examines the tendency of current American bankruptcy law to maintain the social and economic status of middle- and upper-class debtors while doing much less to assist poorer debtors and non-debtors. In doing so, it examines and categorizes various aspects of statutory and case law that allow debtors to preserve their prior economic status. After reconstructing and rebutting the normative arguments offered in defense of these provisions, it suggests a proposal for reforming bankruptcy law to emphasize goals other than the maintenance of economic status.

By Ed Boltz, 4 October, 2018

Law Review: Hunt, John- Help or Hardship?: Income-Driven Repayment in Student-Loan Bankruptcies

Abstract: A drawback of student loans is that a debtor must show “undue hardship” to discharge them in bankruptcy. An advantage of student loans is that most of them may be repaid using income-driven repayment (“IDR”) plans, under which the debtor can satisfy the obligation by paying a share of income over a specified time, even if the payments do not reduce the loan balance to zero. This Article addresses how the availability of IDR should affect the analysis of undue hardship in student-loan bankruptcy.

Drupal blog posts