Quantcast

Tag Archives: Motion for Relief

Civil Practice – Motion for Relief – Summary Judgment Motion & Hearing – Notice – New Address – Meritorious Defense – Unauthorized Use of Account (access required)

Southland Distributors of North Carolina, LLC v. Hamilton Although it appears the trial court found that plaintiff’s counsel received a letter from defendant setting out defendant’s new address, the court made no finding regarding whether counsel received the letter prior to mailing plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and notice of hearing to defendant at his old address.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Motion for Relief – Untimely – Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Credit Card Debt (access required)

Portfolio Recovery Associates, LCC v. Hammonds The pro se defendant filed her motion for relief under N.C. R. Civ. P. 60(b) exactly one year after entry of the final judgment against her. Where all of the facts which informed defendant’s Rule 60(b) arguments were available to her at the time of trial had she exercised due diligence, and where the new legal arguments which defendant raised in her Rule 60(b) motion could also have been raised at trial, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant’s Rule 60(b) motion as untimely.

Read More »

Bankruptcy – Automatic Stay – Motion for Relief – Value of Collateral – Equity — Officers’ Salaries (access required)

In re M.C. Pipe, Inc. The creditor has a security interest in the debtor-in-possession’s real property, equipment, inventory and accounts receivable. When these assets are assigned their fair market value, the assets’ value exceeds the creditor’s secured claim; therefore, the debtor has equity in the collateral, and the creditor is not entitled to relief from the automatic stay. The creditor’s motion for relief is denied. The debtor’s motion to employ and compensate officers is granted in part.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Motion for Relief — Email Hacking — Administrative (access required)

Aikens v. Ingram A former army colonel who accused his former military colleagues of hacking into his e-mails while he was deployed in Kuwait, to support allegations about the colonel’s “hostile command climate and inappropriate relations with women,” cannot persuade the en banc 4th Circuit that the federal district court should hear his case; on rehearing, the 4th Circuit upholds the second dismissal of plaintiff’s case after he lost his administrative claim, because plaintiff could not show “extraordinary circumstances” under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6).

Read More »