A reverse mortgage, having fallen due as a result of the death of the borrower, is not protected from modification by the borrower’s heirs by virtue of § 1322(c)(2). (Halfenger) In re Sandoval, 2022 WL 982182 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. March 31, 2022) Case Summary Juan Sandoval filed Chapter 13 and proposed a plan which dealt with his principal asset, a...
Foreclosure & Bankruptcy Filings Expected to Rise after Recent Florida Supreme Court Decision
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Anne-Marie L. Bowen, Esq. and Alexander H. Bowen
The Florida Supreme Court recently ruled on a monumental case that will allow lenders to refile foreclosure actions that were previously involuntarily dismissed, even though the five-year statute of limitations has run on the prior default. In Bartram v. U.S. Bank, N.A., SC14-1265, 2016 WL 6538647 (Fla. Nov. 3, 2016), the Florida Supreme Court held that a mortgagee/lender’s acceleration of debt due under a residential note and mortgage with a reinstatement provision, in a foreclosure action that was involuntarily dismissed . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or sign in below:
Related Articles
Lights, Camera, Discharge
Critical Case Comment– Reverse Mortgage May be Modified
Watching Where You Step on Dirty Boulevard: De-escalation in Bankruptcy Practice
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Definition of “Tax Return” for Purposes of Nondischargeability
What About Conditional Confirmation?
Critical Case Comment – Discharged Junior in 7 Survives in 13
For You, What Is the Best Part About Retirement
“Jan Hamilton” – Need We Say More?
From the Editor – Claims
Meet Michael Koch – Newish Trustee