Summary: Mr. Daniel, together with the Chapter 13 Trustee subsequently added as a necessary Plaintiff, sought to avoid a pre-petition foreclosure by his homeowner’s association of his residence (in which the upset period had elapsed prior to filing of the bankruptcy) pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1), as it had occurred within two years prior to the filing of the bankruptcy, had made the Debtor insolvent and provided less than “reasonably equivalent value” in exchange for the transfer.

Summary: The Trustee sought to recover a transfer made by the Debtor to James Smith, the principal of the Debtor, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547 and 550(a). At issue was whether the Debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer. The Trustee argued that based on the Debtor’s tax returns and the presumption of insolvency during the 90 days preceding the filing of bankruptcy, that the Debtor was insolvent, whereas Smith asserted that based on the scheduled value of assets and amount of liabilities, the Debtor was solvent. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

Summary: This is the latest of a line of decisions resulting from a complicated set of commercial transactions (which this consumer bankruptcy blog will leave for others to explicate). It does, nonetheless, have few nuggett of use in consumer cases, specifically in Footnote 1 which recognizes that “it is possible that the Counterclaim constitutes a claim filed against the estate.” Cf. Carroll v. Farooqi, 486 B.R. 718, 722-23 (Bankr. N.D.

Summary: The bankruptcy court in this opinion begins by distinguishing between the judicial notice that a court may take of pleadings and proceedings in other courts and judicial estoppel. The bankruptcy court held that while a court cannot take judicial notice of the truth of facts alleged in those pleadings, it can nonetheless take judicial notice that such allegations were made. From the fact that such allegations had been made, the bankruptcy court then turned to determine whether such allegations judicially estopped a party in later proceedings.

Summary: Ferguson obtained a judgment in 2008 against the Robert Dean, who, with his then wife, Lisa Dean, subsequently filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2010. Believing that the real property was held as Tenants by the Entireties, the judgment lien was not avoided and the Deans received a discharge. Subsequently, the Deans divorced with Mr. Dean transferring his interest in the real property to Lisa and her new husband. When Lisa sought to refinance the real property in 2015, the judgment lien was discovered.

Summary: Uncontested evidence showed that the Debtor had failed to disclose the transfer of real property to her brother 15 days prior to the filing of her bankruptcy as well as the omission of ownership interests in an investment club and several bank accounts. While it was determined in a separate action that the transfer of the real property was subject to a pre-existing lien and had no equity, the Bankruptcy Administrator nonetheless sought denial of the Debtor’s discharge under both 11 U.S.C.

Summary: The Debtors sought to strip-off the lien held by PSNC Energy for a HVAC unit as wholly unsecured based on the value of the real property. Without any answer by PSNC, the Court sua sponte held that based on the record, consisting primarily of the Proof of Claim filed by PSNC, that A UCC-1 fixture filing had been recorded within 20 days of installation of the HVAC unit and was, pursuant to N.C.G.S.

Summary: The Court held that Harris v. Viegelahn, 575 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 1829, 191 L.E. 2d 783 (2015) did not prevent a Chapter 13 trustee from paying administrative expenses funds held by the following conversion of the case to Chapter 7 pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1326(a)(2) and Bankruptcy Rule of Federal Procedure Rule 1019. Commentary: Attached to the application for fees was an affidavit from the debtor stating that she understood that the funds on hand could be returned to her but that she nonetheless wanted those funds sent to the her attorney.

Summary: Ms. Novara deposited a check from her mother for $10,000 into her child's custodial account twenty-seven (27) days prior to filing Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The Trustee sought to set this aside as a fraudulent conveyance and sought summary judgment. To prevail on a motion for summary judgment premised on a fraudulent transfer, pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

Summary: Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan was confirmed cramming down the claim of Greater Piedmont Credit Union against mobile home and land, prior to the filing of the Proof of Claim by GPCU showing that title to the mobile home had been cancelled, affixing it to the real property.