Summary:
In his Chapter 7 petition, Mr. Fields listed a 1987 Porsche 911 as non-operational and worth $500. The Trustee, however, obtained a on-site appraisal, which found the vehicle to be operable and worth between $12,000 and $30,000. After the Trustee declined to object, Mr. Fields did receive his discharge, but was unable to buy the vehicle from the Trustee. Instead he sought to have his discharge revoked and to convert to Chapter 13.
Relying on In re Marrama, 549 U.S. 365 (2007), the bankruptcy court held that due to both Mr.
Summary:
The Coopers had a home equity line of credit with First Bank. They refinanced their home with AHMS, which directed First Bank to close the line of credit, but the closing attorney failed to do so.
Summary:
Grimes owns real property with her husband as tenants by the entireties. After filing bankruptcy, she sought to avoid the fixing of three judgments at any later point against that property should it later cease to be held as tenants by the entireties, for example due to divorce or her husband’s death.
The bankruptcy court, dissenting from In re Corey, 2013 WL 3788239 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2013), held that 11 U.S.C.
Summary:
Abuharb filed his first Chapter 13 case, receiving a discharge on January 23, 2014, including any personal liability on a claim owed to Mission Valley Shopping Center (“MVA”) for a judgment in the amount of $38,093.14. At that time, Abuharb owned his residence at 8301 Rubblestone Path, but the Chapter 13 plan provided that the property was to be surrendered. When Abuharb subsequently obtained a loan modification for the mortgage on his residence, he neither modified the plan nor sought to avoid the judgment lien of MVA.
Summary:
Conteh brought suit against Shamrock and its attorney for filing a writ of execution that overstated the amount owed. The actual judgment balance was $1,583.96, but the writ of execution asserted that Conteh owed $1,748.98.
Following Powell v. Palisades Acquisition, 782 F. 3d 119 (4th Cir. 2014) the Court of Appeal reiterated that Conteh’s actual response was not the relevant standard, but instead how “the least sophisticated consumer” would have understood the overstatement.
Summary:
RDLG filed suit against Leonard alleging a pattern of fraudulent activity. Attorneys Lankford and Neyhart entered appearances for Leonard and were still attorneys-of-record when the district court set a pre-trial conference for October 3, 2012. On September 30, 2012, Lankford and Neyhart filed a motion seeking to both continue the October 3rd hearing and also to withdraw as counsel, due to both a lack of communication and payment from Leonard.
Summary:
After the sale of her home, Ms. Smith sought a plan modification to discontinue disbursements on the mortgage, which had until that point been paid as a conduit. The Chapter 13 Trustee requested that Ms. Smith provided amended Schedules I and J or other evidence of current income and expenses. This request was refused and the Trustee objected to the modification.
Starting from In re Arnold, 869 F.2d 240 (4th Cir. 1989) the bankruptcy court held that a post-confirmation required the following:
1.
Summary:
Mr. Powers is the owner of a 50% undivided interest in his home, which has a total value of $292,000.00. Bank of America holds a Deed of Trust against the entire property with a mortgage balance of $180,972.92. Mr. Powers also had three judgment liens against his interest, held, in order of seniority, by John Deere for $14,952.50, Evergreen for $4,617.48, and Farrar for $29,346.44. Upon filing of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, Mr. Powers sought to avoid all three judgment liens as impairing his homestead exemption of $35,000.00.
1
Summary:
The Farags (who were eventually represented by my law firm in their Chapter 13 bankruptcy- all statements in this posting are taken solely from the court decisions) obtained a line of credit in 2002 with Wells Fargo, secured by their real property. This was refinanced in 2004 by PNC, which, based on a pay-off statement from Wells Fargo, paid the balance owed and requested that the Deed of Trust be marked as satisfied and record.
Summary:
BB&T held secured claim against property of the estate. During the initial Chapter 11, BB&T received $62,900 in adequate protection payments. When the case eventually converted and assets were liquidated, paying the secured claim of BB&T, it nonetheless sought a super-priority claim under 11 U.S.C. § 507(b) for its post-petition interest, costs and fees.
In order to hold a super-priority claim BB&T was required to show the following:
1. The adequate protection payments provided ultimately proved to be inadequate.
2.