PLG NEWSNews + updates + recent press
|
Archives
January 2025
December 2024
October 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
March 2024
February 2024
August 2023
May 2023
April 2023
January 2023
November 2022
September 2022
August 2022
June 2022
April 2022
March 2022
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
March 2018
January 2018
December 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
Most are familiar with the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. 362(a) that goes into effect upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition. But, what about the co-debtor stay of 11 U.S.C. 1301 that is imposed in Chapter 13 cases to protect friends, relatives and others who co-signed or are otherwise obligated for debts incurred by the debtor? A co-debtor stay can bar the commencement of a foreclosure action even in cases where the automatic stay does not go into effect due to multiple case dismissals in a 1 year period before the latest petition filed by a debtor. The co-debtor may not even be aware there is a pending bankruptcy case, but their protection works to protect the filing debtor.
Overcoming obstacles relating to proof of mailing of the demand letter to the borrower. Florida courts have recently ruled in favor of borrowers at trial due to the servicer’s failure to prove the demand letter was properly mailed. This is a hot topic throughout Florida due to the high volume of loans that have recently been bought, sold, and transferred from one investor/servicer to another. When a loan is transferred, the current servicer has the evidentiary burden of proving the demand letter was sent pursuant to the terms of the loan agreement. This burden becomes more difficult if the prior servicer sent out the demand letter, or a third party vendor mailed out the letter on behalf of the servicer. Padgett Law Group will help you navigate these obstacles in the most effective way possible.
For more information, contact Steven G. Hurley, Esq. Today, Marissa M. Yaker, Esq., an attorney with Padgett Law Group's Florida practice, was appointed to a three-year term on the Florida Bar’s Grievance Committee (Committee "C") of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Her appointment will begin on January 1, 2019 and concludes on December 31, 2021.
In Florida, Grievance committees are made up of volunteer members, at least one-third of whom are not lawyers. Each of Florida’s 20 judicial circuits has at least one such committee. The grievance committee reviews complaints with much the same purpose as a grand jury. That is, the committee decides, after a case is submitted to them by bar counsel, whether there is probable cause to believe a lawyer violated the professional conduct rules imposed by the Supreme Court of Florida and whether discipline against the lawyer appears to be warranted. "I am thrilled to be appointed to the committee. I am always eager to share my time and insight and I'm looking forward to working with this diverse group of attorneys and other committee members as we work together to ensure that our professional conduct rules are upheld," said Yaker. Marissa's practice is primarily focused on creditors rights' and foreclosure. She is licensed in the state of Florida and is based out of the firm's Ft. Lauderdale, FL office. She can be reached here. On October 24, 2018, the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Ellis v. U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust, Case No. 4D17-2127, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D2380a (October 24, 2018) relied on Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. Glass, 219 So. 3d 896, 899 (Fa. 4thDCA 2017) in affirming the trial court’s order that the borrowers were unable to recover attorney’s fees when the dismissal was based on Plaintiff’s lack of standing.
*This case is not yet final* |
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. |
Padgett Law Group and Padgett Law Group EP are D/B/As of Timothy D. Padgett, P.A. Timothy D. Padgett, P.A.'s practice areas include creditors' rights, estate planning and probate, real estate transactions and litigation. Not all practices or services are available in all states in which Timothy D. Padgett, P.A. practices.
PRIVACY STATEMENT | WEBSITE DESIGN BY SQFT.MANAGEMENT
|