Glendora Wilson-Oliver

CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan
DecidedSeptember 2, 2022
Docket21-21272
StatusUnknown

This text of Glendora Wilson-Oliver (Glendora Wilson-Oliver) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Glendora Wilson-Oliver, (Mich. 2022).

Opinion

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION – BAY CITY

IN RE:

GLENDORA WILSON-OLIVER, Case No. 21-21272-dob Chapter 13 Proceeding Debtor. Hon. Daniel S. Opperman _______________________________________/

OPINION REGARDING FEE APPLICATION OF FREGO & ASSOCIATES – THE BANKRUPTCY LAW OFFICE, PLC

Frego & Associates – The Bankruptcy Law Office, PLC (“Frego”) filed a Fee Application for $10,440.50 of attorney fees and $283.88 of costs for its services and costs rendered for Ms. Wilson-Oliver prior to withdrawing as her counsel. Ms. Wilson-Oliver objects to these fees and costs and refers to her Contract with Frego. After review of this Contract, the pleadings in this case, and considering the Court hearings, the Court awards attorney fees of $4,000 and costs of $283.88 for the reasons stated in this Opinion. Jurisdiction This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157, 28 U.S.C. § 1334, and E. D. Mich. LR 83.50(a). This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A) (matters concerning the administration of the estate). Findings of Fact Ms. Wilson-Oliver suffers from severe economic stress on many fronts and needed expert legal advice, so she consulted with Frego and retained that office on October 9, 2021, as witnessed by a Chapter 13 Client Understanding produced and filed by Frego on July 19, 2022 at Docket No. 1 portions include: You are retaining Frego & Associates – The Bankruptcy Law Office, PLC to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case.

. . .

You received a PLAN OF ACTION during your first visit with us. That PLAN OF ACTION, incorporated here, outlined the basics of what will be paid through the Chapter 13 bankruptcy, and a very rough estimate of what your Chapter 13 Plan Payments will be.

Think of this PLAN OF ACTION as an initial proposal to the Judge and to your creditors about how you wish to reorganize your financial situation. Our attorneys will work with you to get this proposal CONFIRMED and accepted by all (this usually takes the first 3 or 4 months of the case, and often after objections are filed by the Trustee and creditors...the objections are a normal part of the process). Our Chapter 13 proposal can change, especially if we need to negotiate with the Trustee or Creditors on your behalf to get them to agree to the proposal.

We will strive to get your Chapter 13 case confirmed, but need your help. YOU CAN HELP BEST BY MAKING SURE TO ALWAYS MAKE ALL YOUR CHAPTER 13 PAYMENTS AND ALWAYS SHOWING UP FOR COURT.

The undersigned Client(s) employs and retains Frego & Associates – The Bankruptcy Law Office, PLC, hereinafter “Attorneys”, to represent Client(s) in a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.

Accordingly, Frego filed a Chapter 13 Petition on December 1, 2021. Because of the emergency nature of her need for bankruptcy relief, her Schedules, Statement of Financial Affairs, and Chapter 13 Plan were not filed until December 8, 2021. These papers reveal that she owned three parcels of real estate valued at $279,000 and personal property valued at $18,342, which totaled $297,342. 2 follows:

2300 W. Snover Road $195,000 (value) Team One Credit Union $ 2,900 Tuscola County Treasurer $ 9,000

1880 Forks Road $ 70,000 (value) Northstar $106,000 Tuscola County Treasurer $ 9,000

Chambers Road $ 14,000 (value) Tuscola County Treasurer $ 1,407

Unsecured creditors $396

Her Schedules I and J disclose income of $2,752 and expenses of $1,139, resulting in $1,613 of monthly net income. With these assets and creditors, Ms. Wilson-Oliver’s Chapter 13 Plan proposed to treat her creditors as follows:

1. Northstar – Class 4.1 1880 Forks Road $605.00 per month via Trustee

Northstar – Class 4.2 1880 Forks Road $180.00 per month for 60 months $10,800.00 in arrears

2. Team One Credit Union – Class 5.1 2330 W. Snover Road Total to be paid including interest $2,899.80 $48.33 per month via Trustee

3 3. Tuscola County Treasurer – Class 5.2 1880 Forks Road $228.54 per month via Trustee

2330 W. Snover Road $228.54 per month via Trustee

Chambers Road $35.73 per month via Trustee

Her Plan also contained two attachments which included a liquidation analysis disclosing $164,386 as available to her creditors in a Chapter 7 proceeding. The second attachment included an estimate of her attorney fees which Frego prepared indicating $4,000 for attorney fees through confirmation and $3,500 for post-confirmation services, for a total of $7,500. But Ms. Wilson-Oliver’s Chapter 13 was not to be easy for many reasons, including:

A. Northstar Bank filed a lawsuit against Ms. Wilson-Oliver in Tuscola County Circuit Court and obtained a judgment determining that she owed it $105,856.63 plus interest after July 22, 2021. The judgment was entered on August 12, 2021 and although Ms. Wilson-Oliver filed a motion to set aside the default and default judgment, the Tuscola County Circuit Court denied her motion on September 1, 2021. No appeal was taken, so Northstar initiated foreclosure proceedings against Ms. Wilson-Oliver. B. The Tuscola County Treasurer resorted to its Michigan law rights to collect past due real estate taxes and was in the process of completing the necessary court actions to allow for foreclosure of Ms. Wilson-Oliver’s real estate and subsequent sale of that real estate to pay the outstanding taxes. 4 meant that the automatic stay was only in place for 30 days unless extended by the Court. Frego did not file the necessary motion within 30 days and had to resort to the extraordinary procedure of convincing this Court to impose a stay, which it ultimately did on February 14, 2022, but with conditions and limitations. Frego’s fees that are categorized as services related to relief of stay services total $4,337.50. D. The failure to file a timely motion to extend stay resulted in a less than orderly presentation of the issues regarding the Tuscola County Treasurer and Northstar with the added burden placed on Debtor to convince the Court of the requisite facts to support a continuation/extension/imposition of a stay. On the plus side, Debtor did obtain a stay and an

earlier ruling as to the Tuscola County Treasurer, but all at an added and unnecessary cost. E. Debtor’s plan appeared improper when filed because Debtor proposed to pay $1,612.14 per month for 60 months totaling $96,728.40, with $96,328.40 going to creditors or claimants other than Class 9 General Unsecured Creditors. Debtor’s Liquidation Analysis, Attachment 1, however, reported Class 9 General Unsecured Creditors would receive $164,386.05 in a Chapter 7. On its face, Debtor’s plan would not meet the so-called best interest of creditors test as required in 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(4). That said, Debtor listed only $396 in known unsecured debt, but she did list 23 unsecured creditors, with 21 as disclosed with unknown debt amounts. To date, only one unsecured creditor has filed a claim – DTE Energy of $541.45, so this deficiency is not fatal. The potential under secured claim of Northstar, however, would need to be addressed.

After the imposition of the automatic stay, the primary activity in this case involved the proof of claim of Northstar and whether the stay should be continued as to Northstar. Debtor objected to Northstar’s proof of claim and focus has been directed to the amount owed to Northstar, 5 Frego, Frego filed a Motion to Withdraw because of a breakdown of communications and Debtor’s desire to represent herself.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Sharp
367 B.R. 582 (E.D. Michigan, 2007)
In Re New Boston Coke Corp.
299 B.R. 432 (E.D. Michigan, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Glendora Wilson-Oliver, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glendora-wilson-oliver-mieb-2022.