Before getting to today's opinion, a brief programming note. Because the debtor in this case is Black Pearl Vision, I couldn't resist the obvious association with the legendary Black Pearl from the Pirates of the Caribbean films. So, with apologies to Captain Jack Sparrow, this is the first of three pirate-themed bankruptcy posts I'll be publishing this week. 

Summary:

A recent decision from the Western District of North Carolina serves as another reminder that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is ultimately about the accuracy of the information being reported—not whether the consumer believes the reporting is unfair, incomplete, or unsupported.

Summary:

A recent decision from the Western District of North Carolina approving the settlement in Williams & Dantzler v. PHH Mortgage Corp. is worth reading for anyone who litigates consumer class actions. While the court ultimately approved the settlement, it did so only after making unusually pointed observations about the modest value delivered to class members and substantially reducing the requested attorney's fee award.

Hammond v. Bank of America: Can a Creditor Keep Reporting You as Liable Without Proof You Ever Agreed to the Debt?

A recent decision from the Western District of North Carolina provides an important reminder that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires more than simply checking a name and Social Security number when a consumer disputes responsibility for a debt.

Two opinions issued the same day by Judge Matthew E. Orso of the Western District of North Carolina represent an important development under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"). In the first, Judge Orso certified a nationwide class action.

Summary:

In another reminder that arbitration clauses remain powerful—but not limitless—Chief Judge Martin Reidinger of the Western District of North Carolina largely rejected GoodLeap's attempt to force a consumer into arbitration where the very existence of the contract was hotly disputed.

Summary:

In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina, through Judge Ashley Austin Edwards, partially granted and partially denied motions for reconsideration filed by DBMP LLC and related CertainTeed/Saint-Gobain entities regarding a prior privilege and discovery ruling in the sprawling asbestos bankruptcy litigation.

Summary:

In , Judge George Hodges of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina denied a debtor’s attempt to revise an earlier order extending the deadline for filing nondischargeability complaints under 11 U.S.C. § 523(c).

In a decision that should send a chill through every contingent-fee lawyer handling claims for bankruptcy debtors, the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina in Martinez v. Wolper Law Firm held that a law firm that successfully obtained a FINRA arbitration settlement nevertheless lacked an enforceable secured charging lien against the settlement proceeds because it failed to satisfy the Bankruptcy Code’s requirements for employment of professionals and failed to perfect its charging lien before the case settled. 

Summary:

In one of the more consequential procedural rulings yet arising from the ongoing DBMP LLC “Texas Two-Step” bankruptcy, Judge Ashley Austin Edwards granted a stay pending appeal of her earlier privilege-waiver decision that had ordered disclosure of hundreds of allegedly privileged documents in the sprawling asbestos litigation surrounding DBMP and related entities.