top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is this unusual timeline?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Is this unusual timeline?

    Looked at PACER today as this is the 60th day after 341. We already knew that the TT had filed a motion which was granted for an extension of time for her to object to discharge until 9/2. An 532 AP was filed by a default judgement creditor (OK will deal with that next week and try to settle). But what gets me is this:

    The 1st 341 (which was continued) was set for 4/5 is marked SATISFIED 4/6

    The 2nd (Continued) was set for 4/19 (which we went to) wasn't TERMINATED until 5/21. This is 29 days AFTER it was held.

    Objection to Discharge which was set for 6/4 was TERMINATED on 5/19 (2 days prior to the termination of the continued 341)

    On 5/19 TT filed the motion on behalf of herself to extend and it was granted 45 minutes later. (She claimed that she needed more time to decide because she antipated she needed more info from us WHICH SHE HAS YET TO REQUEST although she bought herself 107 days to do it)

    It is my understanding that since the motion to extend was requested by the Panel TT that the Creditors and the UST are still under the 60 day deadline. But this is not how it seems to be reflected on PACER.

    Am I correct is thinking that the deadline for Creditor Objections etc. is still up today?

    Why would the 2nd 341 not be terminated as of the day or day after it was held?

bottom Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X