Summary: In a prior related case, the Plaintiffs brought class action suit against Credit Collections Defense Network (“CCDN”) and several individuals, as attorneys associated with CCDN, alleging a scam that involved promises to assist debtors in legally avoiding credit card debts. See Lucas v. R.K. Lock & Assoc., 710 S.E. 2d 707 (N.C. Ct. App. March 2011).

Summary: The Manuels fell behind on their mortgage and engaged the assistance of Secure Property Solutions (“SPS”) (which is not a party to this action) and Gembala, an attorney licensed in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, in what the Manuels eventually regarded as a “mortgage modification scam.” The Manuels initially filed suit in federal district court alleging various RICO and North Carolina state law violations.

Summary: Epes was the guarantor of a lease on behalf of the lessee, CRC Management. CRC eventually sold its assets to Fuddruckers. In April 2010, Fuddruckers filed bankruptcy. In July 2010, Epes brought an action for a declaratory judgment that he no longer had any liability under the guaranty, however summary judgment was granted to the Defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment for the defendants, finding that the lease included the filing of bankruptcy.

Summary: Dorothy Vogler died testate, with her debts exceeding the value of her real and personal property. Chris Vogler, the executor of her estate, initiated a special proceeding for the purpose of obtaining authorization to sell the real estate that Ms. Vogler had owned at the time of her death and to use the proceeds to pay her debts. Such sale was authorized and subsequently confirmed on January 12, 2011, with the Clerk authorizing payment of the costs of the proceeding and the remaining balance on the mortgage owed to Bank of America (“BOA”) on the real property.

Miller v. Orcutt- Damages as Result of Preference.pdfSummary: The Plaintiffs purchased a home with Countrywide Home Loans providing first mortgage. In addition, the Plaintiffs borrowed the down payment of $56,000 from the Female Plaintiff’s father, Stephen Barnwell (“Barnwell”).

Summary: FIA Cards sued the Debtor seeking recovery of $46,311.81 outstanding on a credit card.  The trial court granted summary judgment to FIA Cards and the Debtor appealed arguing that FIA Cards had failed to prove the existence of an account. The Court of Appeals agreed finding that FIA Cards has only provided three credit card statements from the months surrounding the default.  Further, there was no evidence in the record on appeal that even these statements were verified.  As such, FIA Cards had failed to comply with the requirements of N.C.G.S.

Summary: Real property was titled as "Margaret D.  Smith and D.  Reed and wife, Judy C.  Reed Joint Tenants with rights of survivorship."  Only Ms.  Reed signed the Deed of Trust and mortgage note with Countrywide.  After Ms.  Smith died and the mortgage was in default, Countrywide sought reformation of the Deed of Trust. The Court of Appeal held that originally Ms.  Smith owned a one-half interest in the property with the Reeds as Joint Tenants with the rights of survivorship.  The Reeds owned their one-half interest as tenants b

Summary: Plaintiff brought a complaint against Defendant for monies allegedly owed on a credit card.  Defendant answered and raised counterclaims, to which Plaintiff failed to reply.  Consequently,  default was entered on the counterclaims with $4,500.00 in actual damages, plus $17,912.11 in costs, including attorneys’ fees.  Defendant appealed, questioning, among other things, the reasonableness of the attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeal  held that the standard for reviewing an award of attorneys’ fees was that "the record must contain findings of

Summary: The pro se Debtor attacked a foreclosure on several fronts, first appealing the Clerk of Court authorization of the foreclosure to the Superior Court and then to the Court of Appeals.  The Debtor did not file a motion to stay the foreclosure pending the appeal and the property was sold at auction. The Court of Appeals held that the foreclosure auction mooted the subsequent appeal, leaving nothing to be heard. For a copy of the opinion, please see:

Summary: Plaintiff Harris did not disclose any ownership interest in T-WOL, which had been incorporated in 2000,  when he filed bankruptcy in 2001.  Following suit in 2009, the Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiff Harris should be judicially estopped from asserting ownership in T-WOL. The purpose of judicial estoppel is "to protect the integrity of the judicial process by prohibiting parties from deliberately changing positions according to the exigencies of the moment."  Whitacre P’Ship v.  Biosignia Inc., 358 N.C.