The NACTT Academy offers a comprehensive community for bankruptcy professionals seeking to advance their education in consumer bankruptcy.
ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.
These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.
Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.
The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.
Critical Case Comment – AmeriQuest Mortgage Company v. Nosek (In re Nosek), 2008 WL 4445707 (1st Cir. October 3, 2008)
Print This Article
Link to Post:
AmeriQuest Mortgage Company v. Nosek (In re Nosek), 2008 WL 4445707 (1st Cir. October 3, 2008)
Section 105 cannot be utilized to “enforce” the provisions of § 1322(b)(2). Unless the statute or the plan imposes obligations on a party, it is inappropriate for the court to award damages for inappropriate behavior.
Summary of the Case
In the continuing saga of Jacalyn Nosek’s dispute with AmeriQuest Mortgage Company, the First Circuit considered whether substantial damages for . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Evictions in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee May Go Forward? Sixth Circuit Says CDC’s Eviction Moratorium Exceeded Its Authority
Tax Form 1099 Needs A Closer Look: Chances Are It’s Wrong
Bankruptcy’s Eternal Struggle
Chapter 13 Trustee Duties, Powers, And Limitations – Part 6
Honorable Kevin R. Anderson, U.S. Bankruptcy Court District of Utah
Forced Vesting by Any Other Name – Just Might Work
Personal Injury Attorney’s Duty of Reasonable Inquiry of a Client’s Bankruptcy
Representing Elderly Clients in Bankruptcy – Part 1 of 3
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in City of Chicago v. Fulton
Quick Confirmation – BAP Says Not So Fast