If no opposition to 362(d) motion-auto, is it better
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:42 pm
That was my original thoughts with respect to filing nonop.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Dennis McGoldrick wrote:
>
>
> In the old days it was considered a courtesy to the court to file a nonop.
> Court doen't have to look for a reply, or workup the case.
>
> Dennis McGoldrick
> 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
> Torrance, CA 90503
>
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 9:16 AM, Daniela Romero wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Would like to know what is the better practice. It's really hard for me
> not to file a response indicating there is no opposition on the part of the
> debtor.
>
> Facts: Debtor forgot to advise me that he co-signed auto loan for niece;
> creditor advised me of loan; I amended schedules and they filed RFS; niece
> is 3 months in arrears, in Colorado and debtor has no interest in car; in
> fact, he does not know her exact whereabouts;
>
> Creditor filed 362 motion in debtors name alone--I asked that they amend to
> include niece and they did; debtor has no opposition to motion. car is
> valued at 11k and 3k owed
>
> What is the better practice? FIle response indicating non opp? or just let
> it go without filing response?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Daniela P. Romero
> Law Office of Daniela Romero, APLC
> 1015 N. Lake Ave., Ste. 115
> Pasadena, CA 91104
> Telephone:626-817-2611
> Facsimile: 626-628-1781
> email: dromerolaw@gmail.com
>
> NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic
> Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521. The information herein
> is confidential, privileged & exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> This E-mail (including attachments) are intended solely for the use of the
> addressee hereof. If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
> you are prohibited from reading, disclosing, reproducing, distributing,
> disseminating, or otherwise using this transmission. The originator of this
> e-mail and its affiliates do not represent, warrant or guarantee that the
> integrity of this communication has been maintained or that this
> communication is free of errors, viruses or other defects. Delivery of this
> message or any portions herein to any person other than the intended
> recipient is not intended to waive any right or privilege. If you have
> received this message in error, please promptly notify the sender by e-mail
> and immediately delete this message.
>
> To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of
> Federal tax issues in this e-mail was not intended or written to be used,
> and cannot be used by you, (i) to avoid any penalties imposed under the
> Internal Revenue Code or (ii) to promote, market or recommend to another
> party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
>
>
>
Daniela P. Romero
Law Office of Daniela Romero, APLC
1015 N. Lake Ave., Ste. 115
Pasadena, CA 91104
Telephone:626-817-2611
Facsimile: 626-628-1781
email: dromerolaw@gmail.com
NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521. The information herein
is confidential, privileged & exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
This E-mail (including attachments) are intended solely for the use of the
addressee hereof. If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
you are prohibited from reading, disclosing, reproducing, distributing,
disseminating, or otherwise using this transmission. The originator of this
e-mail and its affiliates do not represent, warrant or guarantee that the
integrity of this communication has been maintained or that this
communication is free of errors, viruses or other defects. Delivery of this
message or any portions herein to any person other than the intended
recipient is not intended to waive any right or privilege. If you have
received this message in error, please promptly notify the sender by e-mail
and immediately delete this message.
To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal
tax issues in this e-mail was not intended or written to be used, and cannot
be used by you, (i) to avoid any penalties imposed under the Internal
Revenue Code or (ii) to promote, market or recommend to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
That was my original thoughts with respect to filing nonop. On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Dennis McGoldrick <easky1@yahoo.com> wrote:
In the old days it was considered a courtesy to the court to file a nonop. Court doen't have to look for a reply, or workup the case.Dennis McGoldrick350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
Torrance, CA 90503On Feb 3, 2010, at 9:16 AM, Daniela Romero <
Hi all,Would like to know what is the better practice. It's really hard for me not to file a response indicating there is no opposition on the part of the debtor.Facts: Debtor forgot to advise me that he co-signed auto loan for niece; creditor advised me of loan; I amended schedules and they filed RFS; niece is 3 months in arrears, in Colorado and debtor has no interest in car; in fact, he does not know her exact whereabouts;
Creditor filed 362 motion in debtors name alone--I asked that they amend to include niece and they did; debtor has no opposition to motion. car is valued at 11k and 3k owed What is the better practice? FIle response indicating non opp? or just let it go without filing response?
Thanks,-- Daniela P. RomeroLaw Office of Daniela Romero, APLC1015 N. Lake Ave., Ste. 115Pasadena, CA 91104Telephone:626-817-2611Facsimile: 626-628-1781email:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.