<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly &#187; Bankruptcy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nclawyersweekly.com/category/opinion-digest/bankruptcy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 20:13:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Lien-Stripping Approved in Chapter 20 Cases&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/bankruptcy-lien-stripping-approved-in-chapter-20-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/bankruptcy-lien-stripping-approved-in-chapter-20-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 20:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[4th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer protection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=73110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Branigan v. TD Bank NA </em>  In a “Chapter 20” bankruptcy case – a Chapter 13 bankruptcy filed within four years of a Chapter 7 discharge – there is no per se rule barring lien-stripping, and the 4th Circuit affirms an order stripping off liens secured by collateral with no value to support them in this suit involving debtors’ residences]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/bankruptcy-lien-stripping-approved-in-chapter-20-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Plan – Objection to Confirmation – Household Size – Daughters in College&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-plan-objection-to-confirmation-household-size-daughters-in-college/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-plan-objection-to-confirmation-household-size-daughters-in-college/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:33:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Middle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ex-wife’s objection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72702</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>In re Johnson</em> While both of the debtor’s daughters are college students with scholarships, the debtor can claim only the younger daughter as a member of his household]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-plan-objection-to-confirmation-household-size-daughters-in-college/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Automatic Stay – Violation – Intellectual Property – Patent Licenses&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-automatic-stay-violation-intellectual-property-patent-licenses/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-automatic-stay-violation-intellectual-property-patent-licenses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obtain possession]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72695</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Angell v. Accugenomics, Inc. (In re Gene Express, Inc.)</em> : On Oct. 1, 2010, the University of Toledo gave notice of termination of the debtor’s license rights to UT’s patents, effective Oct. 31, 2010.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/30/bankruptcy-automatic-stay-violation-intellectual-property-patent-licenses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Judicial Sale – Higher Bid – Motion to Reconsider&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-judicial-sale-higher-bid-motion-to-reconsider/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-judicial-sale-higher-bid-motion-to-reconsider/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public confidence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72681</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>In re Peterkin &#38; Associates, Inc</em>  After this court approved the sale of the debtor’s property, a new bidder offered a substantially higher price.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-judicial-sale-higher-bid-motion-to-reconsider/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Avoidance – Farmer &amp; Silo Facility – Lines of Credit – Insolvency&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-farmer-silo-facility-lines-of-credit-insolvency/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-farmer-silo-facility-lines-of-credit-insolvency/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal benefit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72678</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Angell v. Meherrin Agricultural &#38; Chemical Co. (In re Tanglewood Farms, Inc. of Elizabeth City </em>  Although the complaint plausibly alleges that the proceeds from the lines of credit provided by the defendant-creditors went almost exclusively for the personal benefit of the debtor’s owner rather than the debtor, the debtor and its owner typically paid off the obligations to defendants as they came due until 2009. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-farmer-silo-facility-lines-of-credit-insolvency/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Avoidance – Constructive Fraud Claim – Set Off&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-constructive-fraud-claim-set-off/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-constructive-fraud-claim-set-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debtor’s property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Angell v. Montague Farms, Inc. (In re Tanglewood Farms, Inc. of Elizabeth City) </em> When defendant paid the debtor for soybeans, it withheld from the payment the cost of the seeds the debtor had bought from defendant. This indirect and involuntary disposition of the debtor’s property was a “transfer” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(54)(D) and § 548.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-avoidance-constructive-fraud-claim-set-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211;  Fraud Claim – Retrieving Grain &#8212; Turnover &amp; Accounting – Transfer Avoidance&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-fraud-claim-retrieving-grain-turnover-accounting-transfer-avoidance/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-fraud-claim-retrieving-grain-turnover-accounting-transfer-avoidance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[N.C. Business Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creditors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fraud]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72672</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Angell v. C.A. Perry &#38; Son, Inc. (In re Tanglewood Farms, Inc. of Elizabeth City) </em> The debtor commingled its own grain with that of the defendant, sold much of the grain -- without informing defendant -- and kept all the proceeds. Upon learning of the debtor’s theft, defendant removed a million bushels of grain – about half of what it had stored with the debtor – from the debtor’s facility several months before the debtor filed bankruptcy. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/bankruptcy-fraud-claim-retrieving-grain-turnover-accounting-transfer-avoidance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Civil Practice – Standing – Appeals – No Stay – Real Property Sale&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale-2/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debtor’s sale]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72592</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>In re Meade</em> After the district court affirmed this court’s ruling that Bank of America’s deeds of trust on Lot 978 of Lake Sagamore Subdivision were invalid, the bank appealed to the Fourth Circuit; however, the bank failed to seek a stay pending appeal. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Civil Practice – Standing – Appeals – No Stay – Real Property Sale&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:40:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unsecured Creditors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72590</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>In re Meade </em> After the district court affirmed this court’s ruling that Bank of America’s deeds of trust on Lot 978 of Lake Sagamore Subdivision were invalid, the bank appealed to the Fourth Circuit; however, the bank failed to seek a stay pending appeal. Since the bank has no liens on the real property, it is a general unsecured creditor, and since the debtor is in compliance with his plan as to general unsecured creditors, the bank has no standing to challenge the debtor’s sale of the property to his sister.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-civil-practice-standing-appeals-no-stay-real-property-sale/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bankruptcy &#8211; Preferential Transfers – Avoidance – Defenses – Ordinary Course of Business &#8212; Contemporaneous Value&#160;</title>
		<link>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-preferential-transfers-avoidance-defenses-ordinary-course-of-business-contemporaneous-value/</link>
		<comments>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-preferential-transfers-avoidance-defenses-ordinary-course-of-business-contemporaneous-value/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Most Important Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. D.C. Eastern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pre-preference]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nclawyersweekly.com/?p=72585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Sparkman v. American Residential Services, LLC (In re Anderson Homes, Inc.</em> Before the 90-day preference period, on average, the debtor paid the creditor 48.83 days after a purchase order; during the preference period, the average was 95.23 days (or 96.26 days if disputed entries are excluded). This increase of 95.02 percent (or 97.13 percent if disputed entries are excluded) represents a substantial change in the parties’ dealings during the preference period from the pre-preference period.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nclawyersweekly.com/2013/04/26/bankruptcy-preferential-transfers-avoidance-defenses-ordinary-course-of-business-contemporaneous-value/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
