I generally do not comment on motions and responses filed in bankruptcy cases. I usually wait for a judicial decision, both because that gives the dispute some resolution and because pleadings, by definition, present the parties’ competing positions rather than the court’s conclusions.
But when a towing company files bankruptcy and then asks the Bankruptcy Court to order someone else to give its vehicles back, the irony is a little too much to resist.
McDaniel v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., et al., No. 3:26-CV-00500-KDB-MTO (W.D.N.C. Aug. 31, 2026)
In McDaniel v. Experian, the Western District of North Carolina provides a useful reminder of an increasingly important distinction in Fair Credit Reporting Act litigation: a consumer’s dispute over whether she should have to pay a debt is not, standing alone, an “inaccuracy” in her credit report.
The Western District of North Carolina has denied DBMP LLC leave to take an interlocutory appeal from Bankruptcy Judge Ashley Austin Edwards’ extensive rulings requiring production of hundreds of documents in the long-running DBMP asbestos bankruptcy.
In In re Systematic Audio, LLC, Chief Bankruptcy Judge Laura T. Beyer addressed two frequently litigated issues in Chapter 11 practice: when a bankruptcy court should lift the automatic stay to allow pending state court litigation to proceed, and when (if ever) that stay should be extended to protect a non-debtor corporate officer.
In Hollis v. Lakeview Loan Care, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina dismissed a pro se homeowner's federal lawsuit without prejudice, finding that although the borrower had raised legitimate concerns about her mortgage servicer, she failed to properly identify the defendants, accomplish valid service of process, or plead a recognizable legal claim.
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.
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.
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.
