Skip to main content
Home

Main navigation

  • NC Bankruptcy Cases
    • Eastern District
    • Middle District
    • Western District
  • NC Courts
    • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
    • NC Court of Appeals
    • NC Business Court
    • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • Federal Cases
  • Law Reviews & Studies
    • Book Reviews
  • NC Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
User account menu
  • Log in

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. NC Courts
By Ed Boltz, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: Dodeka, L.L.C. v. Cobb- Standard for Attorneys’ Fees in Consumer Rights Action

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
By Ed Boltz, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: In re Wilson- Failure to Enjoin Foreclosure Pending Appeal

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:
By Ed Boltz, 15 May, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: T-WOL Acquisition Co., Inc. v. ECDG South, L.L.C.: Judicial Estoppel following Failure to Disclose Asset in Bankruptcy

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.
By Ed Boltz, 18 April, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: Finch v. Campus Habitat- No Attorneys’ Fees without Five Days Notice of Intent to Seek Attorneys’ Fees

 Summary:

Finch leased a room from Campus Habitat and asserted that Campus Habitat breached their lease, causing her to move out.  Campus Habitat responded and counterclaimed, receiving judgment for damages and, pursuant to the lease, attorneys’ fees.

By Ed Boltz, 18 April, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: In re Pugh- Arbitration Cannot Be Ordered in Foreclosure Proceeding

Summary: At the foreclosure hearing before the New Hanover County Clerk of Court, the Pughes filed an Election of Arbitration.  The Clerk of Court did not act on this, instead finding that the Substitute Trustee had meet the six statutory requirements to proceed with foreclosure.  The Pughes appealed to Superior Court, where the judge again found that the requirements for foreclosure had been met and declined to rule on the request for arbitration. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that both the Clerk of Court and, on appeal, the Superior Court had scope only
By Ed Boltz, 17 April, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: BB&T v. Teague & Glover- Priority of Reformed Deed of Trust against Bona Fide Purchaser

Summary: While working as a bookkeeper for Teague & Glover, P.A., (T&G) Ms.  Gibbs embezzled substantial amounts.  In addition to criminal prosecution and imprisonment, in 2010, T&G obtained a civil judgment against Mr.  and Mrs.  Gibbs for $800,000.  T&G subsequently agreed to accept all of the Gibbses real and personal property in exchange for a reduction in the amount of the judgment. The property at issue in the present dispute consists of Tract A (0.6 acres) and Tract B (0.7 acres and the Gibbses primary residence).  In 1999
By Ed Boltz, 17 April, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: Songwooyarn Trading Company v. Sox Eleven- Restriction of Transfer of Property Pending Determination of Exemptions

Summary: Songwooyarn Trading Company (STC) obtained a judgment against Defendant Ahn, among others.  Ahn filed a Motion to Claim Exempt Property, to which STC objected, specifically contending that Ahn had failed to list all non-exempt property, had undervalued property, and attempted to exempt property beyond that allowed by North Carolina law.  The trial court held that Ahn had failed to comply with the statutory requirements for claiming exempt property, but allowed Ahn the opportunity to refile his claimed exemptions.  STC again objected and subpoenaed docu
By Ed Boltz, 17 April, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: TD Bank v. Mirabella- Judicial Notice Inappropriate to Show Merger as Basis for Establishing Holder of a Note

Summary: TD Bank filed suit against Mirabella (rather than foreclosing) for amounts owed on a promissory note, originally entered into by Mirabella and Carolina First Bank (CFB).  TD Bank contended that, following its merger with CFB, it stood in the place of CFB.  No evidence, however, was presented at trial of the merger, instead TD Bank argued that the court should take judicial notice of the merger. The Court of Appeals rejected this argument, finding that judicial notice is appropriate for "facts generally known with the territorial jurisdiction."  While
By Ed Boltz, 7 February, 2012

N.C. Court of Appeals: Blue Ridge Savings Bank v. Mitchell- Foreclosure Auction Price not "Substantially Less" than True Value

Summary: The Debtor’s house was sold at a foreclosure auction for $100,000, with Blue Ridge, the mortgage holder, the highest bidder.  Blue Ridge then sold the house at a private sale five months later for $110,000.  Blue Ridge subsequently sued the Debtors for the outstanding balance on the note, roughly $30,000.  The Debtors argued that Blue Ridge violated N.C.G.S.
By Ed Boltz, 20 December, 2011

N.C. Court of Appeals: In re Yopp- Holder of the Note through Corporate Merger; Evidence Allowable in a Foreclosure

Summary: Capital One commenced a foreclosure against the Debtors on a Deed of Trust, originally granted to Chevy Chase Bank, which later merged with Capital One.  The foreclosure was allowed in part based on, among other documents, an Affidavit from James Cox, Vice President of Capital One.  This Affidavit stated that "to the best of [his] knowledge" Capital One was the servicer and holder of the mortgage note. The Debtors objected to this affidavit, arguing that it denoted only Mr.  Cox’s personal opinion and was not made upon personal knowledge as required b

Pagination

  • Previous page
  • 10
  • Next page
NC Court of Appeals

About Us

Mountain View The purpose of the NC Bankruptcy Expert blog is to provide legal professionals with a consolidated resource for updates and case summaries about issues and decisions affecting bankruptcy, foreclosures, mortgages, and debt collection.

 
Lawyer Edward Boltz | Top Attorney Chapter 7

NC Bankruptcy Expert FREE Consultation

We Offer A Free Bankruptcy Consultation which has helped over 70,000 North Carolina families. We serve the entire state of North Carolina.

Proud Member of:












Categories

  • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Book Reviews
  • District Courts
  • Eastern District
  • Ed Boltz: Bankruptcy Attorney
  • Federal Cases
  • Forms
  • Home
  • Law Reviews & Studies
  • Middle District
  • Mortgage Modification Mediation Documents
  • NC Business Court
  • NC Court of Appeals
  • NC Courts
  • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • News
  • North Carolina Bankruptcy Cases
  • North Carolina District Court Cases
  • North Carolina Exemptions Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
  • Student Loan Options and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
  • Western District
RSS feed
v. 1.2.2, © 2013-2025 ncbankruptcyexpert.com, all rights reserved. Follow @edboltz