Follow up on Addendum

Post Reply
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


This is not an insignificant victory!!!! Judge P. Carroll has long been on the record as not approving of the addendum. In fact, he told us in open court that he voted against its adoption in the board of judges meeting. Hats off to Nancy Clark for convincing him otherwise.
M. Erik Clark
Borowitz, Lozano & Clark, LLP
100 N. Barranca Avenue, Suite 250
West Covina, CA 91791
www.BLClaw.com
Office: (626) 332-8600
Fax: (626) 332-8644
Board Certified in Consumer Bankruptcy
American Board of Certification
________________________________

The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yahoo Bot
Posts: 22904
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:38 pm


Today, Judge Peter Carroll ruled in favor of the Addendum with a few interlineations. He stated that if the debtor files the case with the original Addendum and no creditor objects, he will accept the original Addendum but if a creditor objects, he will expect the debtor to amend to add his revised Addendum.
I will post the Addendum in the files for all who need it.
Nancy B. Clark
Borowitz, Lozano & Clark, LLP
100 N. Barranca Avenue, Suite 250
West Covina, CA 91791
Office: (626) 332-8600
Fax: (626) 332-8644
Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with Treasury Department Regulations, we advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication was
not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Post Reply