News + updates + recent press
Padgett Law Group (PLG), a leading regional default services law firm serving the southeastern United States is celebrating 25 years of service this month. PLG currently operates in Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Texas.
“When I founded this firm 25 years ago, my vision was for a dynamic, responsive legal practice that despite success would never lose sight of our boutique, hands-on beginnings. That, and our focus on people, has remained a hallmark of PLG throughout the years and I’m thrilled that this milestone comes on the heels of our expansion into the Texas market,” said CEO Timothy D. Padgett.
“Tim and I are fully focused on the development of PLG. We’re continually developing and deepening our client relationships; developing our internal technology, processes, and staffing; and looking at our growth from a conservative, balanced approach to ensure we can meet clients’ needs while maintaining the Padgett approach to how we do everything,” said Chief Development Officer Robyn S. Padgett.
Growth & Expansion Timeline
The firm was founded in Tallahassee, FL in 1993 by Timothy D. Padgett, who today retains his day-to-day management role within the firm, serving as Chief Executive Officer. The firm expanded throughout the state of Florida, adding offices in Tampa and Fort Lauderdale to provide state-wide coverage.
In 2015, PLG acquired Topping & Associates, PC, which expanded the firm’s practice into Georgia. Today the PLG executive team is based in the firm’s Atlanta office located in the financial services hub of Buckhead. The Atlanta office also manages and processes all Georgia default and bankruptcy matters.
The firm expanded into Tennessee organically in 2013, and operates out of its physical site in Memphis. The firm’s entry into Tennessee was well received by clients with year-over-year growth exceeding projections by over 30% annually.
PLG acquired Arkansas-based default services firm Dyke & Winzerling, PLLC in 2017, and today operates a full-service default practice covering the entire state from its physical office in Little Rock. Success in Arkansas has been tremendous with production growth of 160% inside of 12 months.
Earlier this month, PLG announced the firm’s second organic expansion with the opening of its Dallas, TX office and the commencement of full-service default legal services statewide. Anchoring the Dallas, TX office is the firm’s new Managing Attorney of Bankruptcy Operations, Keena Newmark, Esq. PLG’s bankruptcy practice is national and covers the continental United States, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
About Padgett Law Group
Padgett Law Group (PLG) is an elite, full service creditors rights’ law firm with GSE compliant practices in Florida, Georgia, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Texas (GSE approvals pending). PLG offers exclusive representation to institutional clients such as lenders, mortgage servicers, credit unions, banks, hedge funds, investors, and other financial services industry stakeholders. Leveraging technology in its partnerships with forward-thinking clients gives PLG the ability to focus on the aggressive management and processing of delinquent or under-performing loans, providing clients with an edge when curing or resolving complex legal matters. Learn more about the firm online at PadgettLawGroup.com.
Padgett Law Group (PLG) Attorneys Steven Hurley and Marissa Yaker had the distinct pleasure of working alongside other firms in drafting and collaborating for an Amicus Brief with the United States Supreme Court in Support of the Respondent in Dennis Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP, Case No. SC 17-1307 on behalf of the Legal League 100, an industry trade association in which PLG is a member. The question presented before the United States Supreme Court is whether the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) applies to the enforcement of security interests on property through non-judicial foreclosure proceedings. The Amicus Brief was filed today, Wednesday, November 14. PLG will provide updates on the case as necessary.
Click here to read the full release.
On October 31, 2018, the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Torres v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Case No. 4D17-2727 (Fla. 4th DCA October 31, 2018) held that “evidence that a document was drafted is insufficient, standing alone to establish that it was in fact mailed. Rather, the mailing must be prove by producing additional evidence such as proof of regular business practices, an affidavit swearing that the letter was mailed or a return receipt.” citing Citibank, N.A. for WAMU Series 2007-HE2 TR. v. Manning, 221 So. 3d 191, 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (quoting Allen v. Wilmington Tr., N.A., 216 So. 3d 685, 688 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). The Fourth District Court of Appeal went onto elaborate that if the evidence comes by way of witness testimony, the witness must have personal knowledge of the company’s general practice in mailing letters. Mere reliance on the boarding process to prove that the notice letter was mailed is insufficient.
Local Rule 6007-1 – Surrender of Collateral in Chapter 13 Cases
Scope and Timing
This rule was created in connection with the uniform plan opt-out and governs the surrender of collateral in chapter 13 cases. The rule does not apply if the court orders otherwise, or Debtor and Creditor enter a written agreement (cannot impose personal liability or limit discharge).
Debtors can either surrender pre-confirmation via the plan (Paragraph 7 of plan), or post-confirmation via a Surrender Notice (Paragraph 20 of plan). These procedures must commence within 7 days of the confirmation order, or between 21 – 28 days of Surrender Notice. Either:
Details matter, especially with the Middle District of Georgia’s local bankruptcy plan. The Middle District of Georgia, like the Northern and Southern Districts of Georgia, opted out of the national bankruptcy plan, as did the majority of the federal judicial districts.
What makes the Middle District of Georgia’s local plan different than Georgia’s Northern and Southern Districts’ plans? The surrender provision. Specifically, the termination of the automatic stay as to sections 362 (debtor) and 1301 (co-debtor stay) limits co-debtor stay relief to the collateral and is effective on confirmation. If a creditor plans to proceed against the co-debtor personally, the plain reading of the Middle District of Georgia’s plan requires additional stay relief against the co-debtor. If the lender is interested in the collateral only, no additional relief is needed.
It Arkansas, non-judicial foreclosure sales are often required to be postponed due to a missing “104 Certification” or “104 Letter.” In order to hold a non-judicial foreclose sale in Arkansas, one of the contingencies that must be met is found in section 18-50-104(a)(3) of the Statutory Foreclosure Act. This section provides that the holder of the mortgage or deed of trust must certify to the attorney conducting the sale that each borrower that has applied for loan modification for forbearance assistance has been notified that they did not meet the criteria for any such loan modification for forbearance assistance program. This applies to programs offered by the holder/servicer and to government programs in which the holder/servicer participates. That notice letter must be sent by certified and first-class mail at least 10 business days before the sale date. These letters must be sent by the holder/servicer and cannot be sent by their attorneys.
PLG BLOG DISCLAIMER
The information contained on this blog shall not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion. The existence of or review and/or use of this blog or any information hereon does not and is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Further, no information on this blog should be construed as investment advice. Independent legal and financial advice should be sought before using any information obtained from this blog. It is important to note that the cases are subject to change with future court decisions or other changes in the law. For the most up-to-date information, please contact Padgett Law Group (“PLG”). PLG shall have no liability whatsoever to any user of this blog or any information contained hereon, for any claim(s) related in any way to the use of this blog. Users hereby release and hold harmless PLG of and from any and all liability for any claim(s), whether based in contract or in tort, including, but not limited to, claims for lost profits or consequential, exemplary, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages arising from or related to their use of the information contained on this blog or their inability to use this blog. This Blog is provided on an "as is" basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including, but not limited to, warranties of title or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.