Attorney Frank Thomas Papa's Legal Cases

Bankruptcy and debt

Young couple with disabled children qualify for bankruptcy

Jun 01, 2017

OUTCOME: Discharge of Debtors

A young couple came to our office seeking counsel for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. They had just relocated from out of state and had trouble finding work. The young husband eventually found work but had to ... take a significant pay cut to support his family of five. His young wife could only work part time because most of her time was devoted to her children, one of whom was profoundly disabled. This couple would not have normally qualified for Chapter 7 bankruptcy due to the amount of their household income. However, the significant financial cost of medical treatment and therapy for their disabled child resulted in their qualifying after further inquiry from the United States Trustee's Office. Once the Court entered the Discharge, these clients were overwhelmed with joy! They profusely thanked me, the UST and the Court for making available the fresh start they so desperately needed.

Bankruptcy and debt

Homeless man vs. Credit Union

Oct 01, 2015

OUTCOME: Debtor's Motion Granted to Exempt Homestead Proceeds of $136,000

A hardworking 50 year old gentleman had to quit his job to care for his dying mother. After taking care of his mother for successive years until she passed, this client could not find work, lost his h ... ome to foreclosure and had to file bankruptcy. Just before filing, we learned that his home sold at foreclosure for more than the final judgment and surplus proceeds of $136,000 were sitting in the court registry. After researching the issue, we claimed the proceeds exempt under the Florida Homestead exemption and filed his chapter 7 bankruptcy. Despite the objections of the trustee and a prominent local credit union, we convinced the bankruptcy judge that my client had a right to claim these funds as exempt from seizure by the trustee and creditors. With the court's order, we successfully petitioned the state court to release the full $136,000 to my client. . . and boy could he use the money! He had been living in his pick up truck in the parking lot of a local grocery store. This case was especially rewarding because of the difference I was able to make in this gentleman's life. I was ecstatic to use my expertise to help my client get off of the street and buy a new home with these funds that rightfully belong to him!

Consumer protection

Elderly Grandmother vs. Major Mortgage Bank

Jun 22, 2011

OUTCOME: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Denied holding that the National Bank Act does NOT preempt the FCCPA

Despite losing her home to foreclosure and having to file bankruptcy to discharge the mortgage debt, my client continued to receive an excessive volume of collection calls from the mortgage company in ... violation of Bankruptcy and State Law. The mortgage company called my client on average approximately 7 times per day, 7 days per week for nearly three months in violation of the law! We sued the mortgage company for violation of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA) and contempt for violating Bankruptcy law. The mortgage company hired an expensive (but brilliant) attorney who creatively argued that the National Bank Act should Preempt the FCCPA. My young associate attorney wrote a fantastic brief and I argued the case before the head bankruptcy judge. After nearly nine months, the judge published an extensive opinion ruling that the National Bank Act does not preempt the FCCPA. Shortly thereafter, we settled my client's case for sizable damages for my client. But most important, the mortgage company stopped harassing her. This ruling helped shape the local practice in Consumer Protection Law and preserved a consumer's right to pursue damages under the FCCPA when unlawfully harassed in collection by their mortgage company.

Frank Thomas Papa's Legal Cases (3)

Young couple with disabled children qualify for bankruptcy

Homeless man vs. Credit Union

Elderly Grandmother vs. Major Mortgage Bank