Summary: Under the test formulated by the Supreme Court in Stern v. Marshall the court may enter final judgment in a core proceeding where "the action at issue stems from the bankruptcy itself or would necessarily be resolved in the claims allowance process." Stern, 131 S. Ct. at 2618. Where a defendant has filed a proof of claim, a fraudulent transfer action brought under either section 548 or section 544 becomes a part of the process of allowance and disallowance of claims. See Langenkamp v. Culp, 498 U.S.

Summary: Ferguson Enterprises and People’s United Equipment Finance Corp. (formerly Financial Federal Credit Inc.) filed a joint motion to reopen the Debtor’s Chapter 11 case, seeking clarification and enforcement of a settlement agreement. In response, Blue Ridge Site Development asserted that the accounting in that settlement agreement was erroneous and Ferguson and People’s had been overpaid in the amount of $28,287.90.

Summary: The Debtor excluded $3,913.02 as a marital adjustment to the means test, providing only the phrase “Husband’s Expenses” as the basis for the deduction and failing to include any amounts on Schedule I.

Summary: This is another in the serious of the Inside the Minds books from Aspatore Books, here attempting to provide perspective from experienced Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 Trustees on how to administer consumer bankruptcy cases.

Summary: The Starboard Association administers a condominium consisting of 33 separate buildings.

Summary: Through requests submitted to the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) under the state Freedom of Information Act, S.C. Code Ann. §§ 30-4-10 to -165 (FOIA), Michael E. Spears, Esq., Gedney M. Howe, III, Esq., Richard A. Harpootlian, Esq., and A. Camden Lewis, Esq.

Summary: Global Acceptance Credit, a debt collector and debt buyer, sued Dayton for a debt. Global did not attach a copy of the contract or other writing signed by Dayton evidencing the debt, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 58-70-150. Dayton moved to dismiss, but the trial court allowed amendment of the complaint to include such documents, finding that no new causes of action were asserted, no undue delay or undue prejudice would result. The trial court did, however, note that the attorney for Global “should have paid better attention to N.C.G.S.

Summary: Chapter 7 Debtors had primarily non-consumer debt and the Bankruptcy Administrator sought dismissal under 11 U.S.C. § 707(a), which states that a court may dismiss a chapter 7 case "after notice and a hearing only for cause," without expressly defining "cause." However, "cause for dismissal under § 707(a) has been held to include a lack of good faith in filing the petition." In re Marino, 388 B.R. 679, 682 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2008).

Summary: AccuGenomics, Inc.’s (“AccuGenomics”) sought a determination pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(p)(1)of whether certain patent rights under the license agreement between the debtor and the University of Rochester (“Rochester”) were considered property of the estate.

Summary: The Debtors paid their attorney $10,000 prior to filing Chapter 11 for pre-petition services, with nothing owed to the attorneys at the time of filing. In order to secure fees for services rendered during the pendency of the case, the Debtors granted their attorneys two future advance deeds of trust on tracts of land owned by the Debtors. The Bankruptcy Administrator objected to the application to employ the attorneys, asserting that the attorneys were not disinterested persons as defined in § 101(14) and as required by § 327(a).