Summary:
Debtor filed a reaffirmation agreement with Ally for a vehicle with the bankruptcy court, despite showing that her monthly income minus monthly expenses resulted in a negative net income, indicating a presumption of undue hardship. The reaffirmation stated that the Debtor intended to adjust her expenses to afford the car payments. The Debtor’s attorney did not complete the certification in the reaffirmation that there was no undue hardship. Due to the absence of the attorney certification, the bankruptcy court set the reaffirmation for hearing.
Summary:
The Court had previously entered a Consent Order that allowed Bank of America to proceed with foreclosure against some of the property of the estate and also appointed a Chapter 11 Trustee. TP subsequently filed a Motion to Set Aside or Modify the Consent Order allowing foreclosure.
Summary:
Three venture capital firms (“the Movants”) provided secured debt financing to Taproot and owned a controlling interest in Taproot. In December of 2009, Taproot entered into a contract to sell its assets to Neusoft, with The Hina Group (“THG”) acting as a broker. In May 2010, THG brought suit against Taproot and the Movants, seeking to recover the unpaid broker fees. Taproot was represented by both Wyrick Robbins and Sheppard Mullin and the Movants were represented by DLA Piper.
Summary:
American Residential Services, L.L.C (“American”) received $186,419.35 from the Debtor in the 90-days preceding its bankruptcy and the Trustee sought to avoid such payments as a preference under 11 U.S.C. § 547. The parties agreed that the Trustee had met his burden regarding the first four requirements of § 547(b), but that he had failed to show that American had received more than it would have under Chapter 7, as American “could and would have filed appropriate claims of lien ...
Summary:
The Debtor was entitled to one-half of her ex-husband’s military retirement, but was also liable for one of their children’s student loan debts. The Debtor was in default on such payments and her ex-husband paid $4,183.07 on that debt. The property settlement required the Debtor to indemnify her ex-husband for payments on the student loan debt.
11 U.S.C.
Summary:
This case involves two bankruptcy cases putatively filed by Melanie Mangum. At a hearing in November 2011, the Trustee raised several concerns regarding that case- First, no Power of Attorney had ever been presented authorizing Ms. Mangum’s husband, Donald Mangum, to represent his wife. The two parties also had several previous bankruptcies. Third, the Trustee had discovered (while reviewing Ms. Mangum’s Facebook statement that she enjoyed spending time at her beach house) that Ms. Mangum had unscheduled real property located at Carolina Beach. Further, Ms.
Summary:
The Debtor granted Royal Bank America (“RBA”) a first Deed of Trust against a 36-unit condominium complex, in the amount of $17,000,000 and also a “Put Agreement”, which obliged the guarantors of the Deed of Trust, to obtain permanent financing for 10 of the units. At the same time, the Edwards Family Partnership, L.P. (“EFP”) was granted a junior Deed of Trust for $3,000,000.
The RBA loan originally matured on July 1, 2009, but the Debtor exercised its right to extend the loan to January 1, 2010.
Summary:
The Debtor and Nicholas Stratas, the sole manager of the Debtor, agreed to a Consent Order, to allow and cooperate with Paragon in its foreclosure against real property owned by the Debtor. Despite this agreement, Stratas filed a motion to set aside the subsequent foreclosure proceeding because the Substitute Trustee mumbled and was rude at the Foreclosure Hearing, depriving him of the opportunity (preserved in the earlier Consent Order) to bid at the foreclosure.
