The NCMB offers a database of opinions for the years 2000 onward, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.

Case dismissed for cause under section 1112(b), including substantial continuing loss and an absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation, unexcused and untimely filing of schedules and monthly report, and bad faith.

Dismissal, Published No

Case dismissed under 11 U.S.C. 707(a) for lack of good faith.

Dismissal, Published No

Where attorney files purported reaffirmation agreement with affidavit that does not comply with section 524(c)(3), the court will conduct a hearing on the reaffirmation agreement under Local Rule 4008-1(d) at which the attorney signing the affidavit shall appear.

Reaffirmation, Published No

Judgment denying discharge under 727(a)(2) and awarding of damages to trustee for unauthorized disposition of estate assets.

Discharge/Dischargeability, Published No

Creditor objected to confirmation of chapter 13 plan based on 11 U.S.C. 1322(a)(2) and 1325(a)(3). The Court found cause to overrule the Creditor's objection and confirm Debtor's Plan.

Chapter 13 Plans, Published No
In re Price (Case No. 17-10488) 10/19/2017
(Judge Catharine R. Aron)

Debtors attempted to separately classify a student-loan debt and proposed to make monthly payments on the debt using their discretionary income. The Court denied confirmation of the plan under 1322(b)(1).

Chapter 13 Plans, Published No

Court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment or partial summary judgment as to a complaint seeking revocation of the defendant's discharge under 727(d)(1).

Summary Judgment, Published No
In re Carter (17-50262) 05/11/2017
(Judge Lena M. James)

Serial Debtor filed a petition under Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code. On motions to dismiss by multiple creditors, the court concluded that the Debtor was ineligible to seek relief under Chapter 12 as the sale of gravel does not constitute farming. Further, the case was dismissed for having been filed in bad faith.

Dismissal, Published No
In re Black (17-50064) 03/02/2017
(Judge Lena M. James)

Alleged debtor was in an accident while driving the petitioning creditor’s vehicle, and petitioning creditor was injured and retained counsel. Petitioning creditor eventually obtained a default judgment and planned to file an involuntary petition to use a bankruptcy trustee to assert first-party non-assignable state law claims against insurers. Insurers provided alleged debtor with counsel to seek to set aside the default judgment, and the petitioning creditor obtained a writ of execution that went unsatisfied and immediately filed the petition. Alleged debtor responded to the petition, seeking dismissal of the case on several grounds, including bad faith. The court found the alleged debtor overcame the presumption that the involuntary petition was filed in good faith, and the case was dismissed. The court noted that the involuntary petition strategy itself raised serious questions of good faith; that the case was a two-party dispute and an improper attempt at debt collection; that it was abnormal to consider filing an involuntary petition prior to executing on a judgment; that petitioning creditor's counsel, both in state court and in bankruptcy, made misleading statements and took misleading actions that constituted questionable conduct, may have contributed to obtaining the default judgment, and raise ethics concerns; that the race to file the petition appeared to be an attempt to cut off alleged debtor's ability to seek review of the judgment; and that alleged debtor should be allowed to pursue his own state law claims and there is no wasting asset.

Dismissal, Published No
In re Jolly 02/27/2017 02/27/2017
(Judge Benjamin A. Kahn)

Debtor claimed an exemption in a retirement annuity pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1C-1601(a)(9).  Trustee objected to this exemption because it did not meet the requirements provided for in that subsection.  Debtor contended that even though the annuity did not meet the standards of an individual retirement plan under the Internal Revenue Code, it should be held as exempt because it is a plan treated in the same manner as an individual retirement plan.  The Court sustained Trustee's objection, finding that the Debtor's annuity was not sufficiently similar to an individual retirement plan to entitle the Debtor to an exemption in this property.

Exemptions, Published No


Subscribe to Opinions