Summary:
Construction Supervision Services (“CSS”) filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January 2012, after which several subcontractors, which had previously provided stone, concrete, and fuel to CSS on an open account, sought to serve notice of liens on funds owed by others to CSS, thereby perfecting such liens. BB&T, which had lent CSS money, objected to the Subcontractors’ post-petition notice and perfection, arguing that such actions violated 11 U.S.C.
By Ed Boltz, 21 May, 2014
Summary:
The Scheiders refinanced their South Carolina home in 2006 with a $1.178 million adjustable rate note payable to Mortgage Network, granting a mortgage securing the note, which provided that MERS would act as the nominee for Mortgage Network. Mortgage Network subsequently transferred the note, with an endorsement that read “Pay to the order of ______ Without Recourse.” , with the blank later being filled with “IndyMac Bank F.S.B.” Indy Mac later endorsed the note in blank, without recourse, and it is currently held by Deutsche Bank.
By Ed Boltz, 5 May, 2014
Summary:
Santoro brought suit against Accenture, alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act.
By Ed Boltz, 5 May, 2014
Summary:
Patricia Pfister and her husband, Phillip Pfister purchased real property on May 10, 2001. Originally, this property was to be purchased by Architectural Glass Construction, Inc. ("AGC"), a corporation wholly owned by Mr. Pfister, but, on the advice of accountants, instead at the closing it was instead purchased and financed by the Pfisters, with the intention of leasing the property to AGC. In practice, however, AGC never paid the Pfisters, but paid the mortgage directly. In 2002, the mortgage was refinanced, with AGC now actually liable for the mortgage note.
By Ed Boltz, 2 May, 2014
Summary:
Abdelbary was convicted of wire fraud, money laundering, currency structuring, bankruptcy fraud, and perjury and was sentence to 24 months in prison, entered a criminal forfeiture judgment against Abdelbary for $112,229.31 and also ordered Abdelbary to pay restitution to Jordan Oil of $84,079.35 for attorney’s fees incurred during the bankruptcy proceeding.
By Ed Boltz, 28 April, 2014
Summary:
Trustee Gold requested a trustee commission, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(7), based on the percentages set forth in § 326(a), of $17,254.61.
By Ed Boltz, 9 April, 2014
Summary:
The Joneses brought a breach of contract claim against Fulton Bank, alleging that Fulton Bank failed to send them a proper thirty-day pre-acceleration notice. See Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Simmons, 654 S.E.2d 898, 901 (Va. 2008). The Joneses also challenged the appointment by Fulton Bank of a Substitute Trustee with instructions to commence foreclosure as not complying with the Deed of Trust.
By Ed Boltz, 9 April, 2014
Summary:
In 2007, Bane’s company, Aequitas-Energy, Inc., purchased fifty acres of land (the Angel Lane Property) in Roanoke County, Virginia, from Bane’s mother, Martha Bane, who was granted at $400,000 mortgage against the property. This mortgage was never recorded and the later mortgage to Community Trust Bank was accordingly superior. Bane, having fallen into default on the Coummunity Trust mortgage and facing foreclosure, had the property transferred into his name and filed bankruptcy in 2010, the day before the foreclosure sale.
By Ed Boltz, 8 April, 2014
Summary:
Stephens fell delinquent on her mortgage with HSBC and, prior to HSBC taking any action, sought a declaratory judgment that her mortgage contract was void ab initio, as it contained a waiver of her appraisement rights under South Carolina Code § 29-3-680.
By Ed Boltz, 28 March, 2014
Summary:
At issue in this case was first whether the Applicable Commitment period, as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(4), was a temporal requirement, i.e. 3 years for below median income debtors or 5 years for those with income above median, or was not applicable if the Debtors had no disposable income under § 1325(b)(1). Agreeing with now all of the Circuit Courts that have answered this question, the 4th Circuit held that the Applicable Commitment Period is, in fact temporal.