Prior to filing bankruptcy,  Mr.  Faison had received an offer to purchase his real property from Marlowe & Moye for $1.1 million dollars, conditioned on improved road access being allowed by the Town of Knightdale.  When that was not granted, the sale fell through and Mr.  Faison eventually filed Ch.

Ms.  Musenge rented a set of tires from Smartway, signing a lease that included permission to contact her, through live and automated calls, through her mobile telephone and further agreeing that she “waived the protections of all rights to privacy laws.”  When she fell behind on payments, Smartway not only began sending text messages for collection but also promotional advertisements.  Ms.

In apparent connection with a foreclosure,  Richardson, acting pro se, brought and FDCPA suit for failure to adequately verify debts under 15 U.S.C.  § 1692(g) against Shapiro & Brown, Nationstar Mortgage and Rushmore Loan Management.  In a very terse one-page memorandum opinion, the district court dismissed the case due to res judicata and the statute of limitations.  It can be surmised  only from the brief filed by Nationstar at the district court with its Motion to Dismiss, that Richardson had previousl

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

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.

Mr.

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