Sandra Watkinson vs. Statebridge Co., LLC, Christiana Trust
We won another federal court trial, see in re Watkinson, MA BK Adv. Pro. No. 19-1071-FJB wherein the Court dismissed the remaining counts against the Mortgagee-Servicer-Creditor-Defendants.
The amended complaint asserted Four (4) counts against one or both of the Defendants. In Count I, the Debtor sought damages against both Christiana and Statebridge for violation of provisions of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), 12 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., concerning the obtaining of forced place insurance on the Property.
In Count II, the Debtor sought damages against both Christiana and Statebridge for violation of MASS. GEN. LAWS ch. 93A.
In Count III, the Debtor objected to Christiana’s Proof of Claim, asking that it be disallowed on the basis that Christiana does not hold the promissory note or own the mortgage on which its claim is predicated.
And in Count IV, the Debtor claimed damages against Statebridge (not also Christiana) for another violation of MASS. GEN. LAWS ch. 93A.
The Court also overruled the Debtor’s objection to the Defendants' Proof of Claim. #12 USCA sec. 2605 #Bankruptcy Rule 3001(d) #Bankruptcy Code 11 USC 502(b)(2) # Federal Rule Civil Procedure 15(b)(2) amendments to complaints #MGL 93A sec 2
Athens vs. Bank of America
To secure forgiveness of a PPP loan, the borrower must submit to the lender certain documentation demonstrating that the loan meets the requirements for forgiveness, as well as a certification that the loan proceeds were used for permitted purposes. See 15 U.S.C. § 636m(e). If a borrower fails to provide the necessary documentation, its loan is not eligible for forgiveness. Id. at § 636m(f).
In chapter 13 cases, a timely filed proof of claim is a precondition to allowance of the claim and the creditor’s right to receive a distribution.” San Miguel Sandoval v. Sandoval (In re San Miguel Sandoval), 327 B.R. 493, 512 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2005). See also Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(a) (requiring creditors to file proofs of claim for the claim to be allowed). Under Rule 3002(c) “a proof of claim is timely filed if it is filed not later than 70 days after the order for relief . . . .” Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c). 11 Generally, tardily filed proofs of claim are disallowed. See 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9). A court may extend the time in which a creditor must file a proof of claim if one of seven exceptions is met. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c)(1)-(7).
Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Schleicher & Stebbins Hotels, L.L.C.
2021 BNH 003 (denying leave to amend complaint on futility grounds because proposed amended claims were either precluded by final sale order, application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel, or expiration of statute of limitations).
Real Estate Transactions 2022
Attorney William Amann will present at the National Business Institute's January 28 course, "Real Estate Transactions 2022," on Friday, January 28. The day-long program will provide an overview of significant changes and the best practices you should be implementing for the new year. From contracts to cybersecurity issues, get the guidance you need to represent clients with competence and confidence. Click below to register.
2022 Bankruptcy Case Law & Rule Change Roundup
I'm looking forward to presenting at National Business Institute’s upcoming course, “2022 Bankruptcy Case Law & Rule Change Roundup” on Wednesday, January 12, 2022.
Use Promo Code FSPN50 at checkout to get $50 off! Hope to see you there!
Stay Ahead of the Latest Developments
Are you up to date with the most recent changes in bankruptcy law? This program is designed to bring you current major appellate decisions, recent changes to the bankruptcy code, rumblings in student loan law, and more! Don't risk practicing with outdated resources - register today!
The Blue Ice vs SBA case.