Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Capital Communications Federal Credit Union v. Boodrow

Cap. Commc’ns Fed. Credit Union v. Boodrow, 522 U.S. 1117 (1998)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1998-02-23
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • acknowledging, in a case tried before Wells but argued on appeal after Wells, that materiality is not an element of § 1014 and thus holding that the district court had not erred in refusing to apply pre-Wells precedent
  • “Since cause is not defined in the Code, a court has broad discretion to lift the stay in ‘appropriate circumstances’ ”
  • section 521(2) does not prevent a debtor who is current on loan obligation from retaining collateral and making payment under original loan agreement without reaffirming, surrendering, or redeeming vehicle
  • court’s refusal to approve affirmation agreement constitutes harm to creditor

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Capital Communications Federal Credit Union v. Boodrow. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
50 opinions

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.