Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=6615598
Abstract:
The American Bar Association's Commercial Law Education Task Force was formed to bring renewed attention to the importance of commercial law in legal education. There has been a significant decline in commercial law course offerings at U.S. law schools, and we write to law schools to ask them to prioritize and encourage commercial law offerings.
In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina, through Judge Ashley Austin Edwards, partially granted and partially denied motions for reconsideration filed by DBMP LLC and related CertainTeed/Saint-Gobain entities regarding a prior privilege and discovery ruling in the sprawling asbestos bankruptcy litigation.
In , the Fourth Circuit in Jackson v. Protas, Spivok & Collins LLC held that a debt collection law firm could not enforce an arbitration clause contained in a consumer loan agreement because the firm was not “servicing” the loan within the meaning of the contract.
In LaRosa v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Fourth Circuit held that interest obligations arising from an erroneous IRS refund can constitute “unpaid tax” eligible for equitable innocent spouse relief under 26 U.S.C. § 6015(f).
In American Acceptance Corporation of SC v. Gietz , the Fourth Circuit held that a secured creditor’s rights in collateral can temporarily give way when the property becomes critical evidence in a criminal prosecution.
In , Judge Pamela McAfee denied confirmation of the Clarks’ Chapter 13 plan after concluding that continuing to spend $1,715 per month on private Christian school tuition while proposing to discharge roughly 90% of more than $300,000 in unsecured debt was inconsistent with the good faith requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(3).
In , Judge George Hodges of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina denied a debtor’s attempt to revise an earlier order extending the deadline for filing nondischargeability complaints under 11 U.S.C. § 523(c).
In a decision that should send a chill through every contingent-fee lawyer handling claims for bankruptcy debtors, the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina in Martinez v. Wolper Law Firm held that a law firm that successfully obtained a FINRA arbitration settlement nevertheless lacked an enforceable secured charging lien against the settlement proceeds because it failed to satisfy the Bankruptcy Code’s requirements for employment of professionals and failed to perfect its charging lien before the case settled.
