.jpg)
Student Loan Case, Proper Defendants
Even if you don't name ECMC, it often will intervene as the real party in
interest. Out of an abundance of caution, you should name every possible
defendant and let the defendants sort out who is the proper party.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:37 PM, jbsesq1965 wrote:
>
>
> I have prpared an adversary against ECMC for student loans on 523(a)(8)
> grounds for hardship. The debtor previously recieved letters from the U.S.
> Department of Education indicating that as a result of the default years
> ago, his social security is forfiet and all other sorts of bad things for
> him. It looks to me like the U.S. DOE has ACTUALLY PAID on the guarantee. Is
> ECMC the right party here, or do I add the U.S. Department of Education?
> Does anyone have any experience with this?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeff Smith
>
>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by
the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Even if you don't name ECMC, it often will intervene as the real party in interest. Out of an abundance of caution, you should name every possible defendant and let the defendants sort out who is the proper party.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:37 PM, jbsesq1965 <jsmith@cgsattys.com> wrote:
I have prpared an adversary against ECMC for student loans on 523(a)(8) grounds for hardship. The debtor previously recieved letters from the U.S. Department of Education indicating that as a result of the default years ago, his social security is forfiet and all other sorts of bad things for him. It looks to me like the U.S. DOE has ACTUALLY PAID on the guarantee. Is ECMC the right party here, or do I add the U.S. Department of Education? Does anyone have any experience with this?
Thanks.
Jeff Smith
-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq. Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Phone: (888) 619-8222 x101Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite: www.gobklaw.comWE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I have prpared an adversary against ECMC for student loans on 523(a)(8) grounds for hardship. The debtor previously recieved letters from the U.S. Department of Education indicating that as a result of the default years ago, his social security is forfiet and all other sorts of bad things for him. It looks to me like the U.S. DOE has ACTUALLY PAID on the guarantee. Is ECMC the right party here, or do I add the U.S. Department of Education? Does anyone have any experience with this?
Thanks.
Jeff Smith
The post was migrated from Yahoo.