Summary:
The Debtor, after various alleged inconsistencies and shenanigans by Wells Fargo in application of her payments and insurance proceeds, as well as failures in the review of her loan modification application, filed bankruptcy and brought suit alleging, among other causes of action, breaches of contract and duties of good faith & fair dealing and fiduciary duty, fraud and constructive fraud, and violations of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practice Act. Wells Fargo sought dismissal for failing to state a claim. Following Wigod v.
By Ed Boltz, 28 April, 2014
Summary:
Walter sought discovery relating to communications between Waffle House and Jonathan Waller, who had served as general counsel to Waffle House since 2001. Waffle House, asserting attorney-client privilege, directed Waller not to respond. The difficulty, however, was that Waller provided legal services for Waffle House in Georgia, but only held an inactive law license in Illinois and no where else.
By Ed Boltz, 7 April, 2014
Summary:
The Debtor served a copy of a Motion to Avoid the Judgment Lien held by Main Street Acquisition Corp. at its place of business and also by serving its attorney in the state court action.
By Ed Boltz, 27 March, 2014
Summary:
Chapter 13 Debtors had fallen behind on payment under their confirmed plan, wherein the mortgage held be Wells Fargo was paid directly by the Debtors. Instead of following the more customary path of seeking relief from the automatic stay, Wells Fargo instead sought dismissal of the Chapter 13 case. The Motion to Dismiss was resolved by bringing the payments “inside” the Chapter 13 plan, but the parties could not agree on the allowance of attorney’s fees in the amount of $350.00.
By Ed Boltz, 20 May, 2013
Summary:
The Debtor sought to have the bankruptcy judge recuse herself, based on an alleged financial interest held by the judge in JP Morgan Chase, a party in an adversary proceeding.
By Ed Boltz, 20 May, 2013
Summary:
Clean Burn Fuels (CBF) operated a pant that converted corn supplied by Purdue Bionery (Purdue) into ethanol. The agreement between the parties provided that Purdue would retain ownership of the corn until it was delivered to CBF, defined as the when it passed over a weigh belt, the final stage before the conversion of the corn into ethanol began.
By Ed Boltz, 26 March, 2013
Summary:
The SEC filed a complaint against the Debtor and two other individuals in 2005 alleging they had engaged in a $60 million Ponzi scheme, specifically alleging that the Debtor unlawfully sold unregistered securities, was not registered as a broker-dealer when selling certain billboards, and failed to disclose material information to investors. In 2006, the Debtor and the SEC filed a consent judgment wherein the Debtor agreed to, among other terms, disgorge nearly $2 million.
By Ed Boltz, 26 March, 2013
Summary:
Lee and Patsy Hilliard were married in 1975 and both served as officers of Royal Tours. Following their separation in 2008, the couple entered into a Separation Agreement whereby Patsy Hilliard resigned her position with Royal Tours and accepted a cash payment from Royal Tours in lieu of an Equitable Distribution consisting of 108 monthly payments of $3,500.
The Chapter 7 Trustee alleged that the twelve payments made prior to the bankruptcy filing were preferences pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547.
By Ed Boltz, 25 March, 2013
Summary:
The Debtor had filed four case within nine months. The first was dismissed for failure to obtain credit counseling, although no schedules had been filed either nor had the Debtor attended the §341 Meeting of Creditors. The second case was dismissed for failure to file schedules, attend the §341 Meeting of Creditors, or make any payments. The third case was voluntarily dismissed following partial payment of the filing fee and filing of schedules, but still without attendance at the §341 Meeting of Creditors or any plan payment.
By Ed Boltz, 21 March, 2013
Summary:
Following conversion from Chapter 13, the Debtor sought to redeem a motor vehicle based on the NADA trade-in value from the commencement of the bankruptcy case. Finding that BAPCPA amendments in 2005 to 11 U.S.C. § 506(a)(2) abrogated the previous rule as stated in In re Murray, No. 00-10603, slip op. at 5-6 (Bankr. M.D.N.C.