=?utf-8?Q?Re:_[cdcbaa]_Waiver_of_180_Days_Under_=C2=A7109=28g=29=282=29?=
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 9:29 am
David,
You probably saw this article http://www.stjohns.edu/sites/default/fi ... elmann.pdf
What happened in the first case and why are they filing the second case?
I hope this helps
David Jacob
This message is from an attorney and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential, including, without limitation, attorney-client privileged communication(s) and/or confidential attorney work product. Unless you are the addressee or authorized to receive messages for the addressee, you may not use, copy,or disclose this message or any information contained herein. If you havereceived this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail and delete any version, response, or reference to it. Thank you.
> On Jun 5, 2017, at 10:31 AM, David Tilem DavidTilem@TilemLaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> Has anyone successfully petitioned the Court to permit a filing in less than 180 days despite 109(g)(2)?
>
>
>
> David A. Tilem
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist Since 1997
>
> Law Offices of David A. Tilem
>
> 206 N. Jackson St., #201
>
> Glendale, CA 91206
>
> Tel: 818-507-6000 * Fax: 818-507-6800
>
> Toll Free: 888-BK PRO 4U (888-257-7648)
>
> www.TilemLaw.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The pages comprising this transmission may contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION from Law Offices of David A. Tilem. This information is intended solely for use by the individual or entity named as the recipient hereof. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately so we may arrange and correct this transmission.
>
>
>
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.