In re Holder

2 Citing cases

  1. In re Walker

    161 B.R. 484 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1993)   Cited 12 times
    Stating “as a matter of administrative practicality, the date on the title certificate constitutes the lender's perfection date. Commercial reality demands that parties be able to rely upon the lien perfection information contained [on] the title ... [g]reat uncertainty would be injected into credit and other transactions involving motor vehicles if parties were allowed to impeach or contradict the lien recording information....”

    In re Hamilton, 892 F.2d 1230 (5th Cir. 1990); In re Holloway, 132 B.R. 771 (Bankr.N.D.Okla. 1991); In re Holder, 94 B.R. 395 (Bankr.M.D.N.C. 1988); In re Scoviac, 74 B.R. 635 (Bankr.N.D.Fla. 1987); In re Murray, 27 B.R. 445 (Bankr.M.D.Tenn. 1984).

  2. In re Beasley

    183 B.R. 857 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1995)   Cited 9 times

    See also In re Walker, 161 B.R. 484, 501 (Bankr.D. Idaho 1993), aff'd, 178 B.R. 497 (D.Idaho 1994); In re Holloway, 132 B.R. 771, 773 (Bankr.N.D.Okla. 1991); In re Holder, 94 B.R. 395, 398 (Bankr.M.D.N.C. 1988), aff'd, 94 B.R. 394 (M.D.N.C. 1988), aff'd, 892 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1989) (issue of applicability of state law relation-back period not appealed to the circuit court); In re Scoviac, 74 B.R. 635, 637-38 (Bankr.N.D.Fla. 1987); In re Murray, 27 B.R. 445, 451 (Bankr.M.D.Tenn. 1983).