Search Opinion

In re Fisher

Debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. The debtor filed a complaint against defendant credit union seeking the turnover of property pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 542. The debtor sought an order requiring the credit union to turnover title to the debtor's vehicle or an order releasing the lien. The debtor filed a motion for entry of default.
Ruling: 
Debtor's motion for default in turnover proceeding denied due to improper service upon credit union.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Fisher. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on September 12,2008, LexisNexis #1108-035

Carlo v. Orion Omniservice Co. (In re Carlo)

Plaintiff debtor filed a complaint against defendant creditor to determine the dischargeability of a debt. Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7055(a), the debtor moved for default. The issue was whether Fed. R. Bankr. 7004(b)(3) required service addressed to the attention of an individual by name and office title, or simply by office title.
Ruling: 
Notice requirements for due process must be balanced with expeditiousness of bankruptcy proceedings.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Carlo v. Orion Omniservice Co. (In re Carlo). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on August 15,2008, LexisNexis #1208-104

Israel v. Direct Loans (In re Israel)

Defendant United States (U.S.) filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff debtor's complaint to determine the dischargeability of a student loan debt owed to the U.S.
Ruling: 
Debtor allowed opportunity to properly reserve student loan dischargeability complaint upon the U.S. attorney.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Israel v. Direct Loans (In re Israel). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on June 13,2008, LexisNexis #0808-129