In re Sundquist v. Bank of America, Case No. 10-35624 (Bankruptcy court, E.D. CA. 1/18/18)
Bank of America, with a gun to the Sundquists’ heads…
This motion to dismiss began as a hostage standoff. Bank of America, with a gun to the Sundquists’ heads, said it would pay them several million dollars more than the $6,074,581.50 awarded to them, but only if this court first dismisses the adversary proceeding so as to vitiate the opinion in Sundquist v. Bank of America (In re Sundquist), 566 B.R. 563 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2017).
There being no legal obstacle to Bank of America paying the Sundquists without any judicial action, this was a naked effort to coerce this court to erase the record. No chance. No dice.
To name and to shame Bank of America on the public record in an opinion that stays on the books serves a valuable purpose…
This court remains persuaded that the conduct warranting significant damages resulted from a corporate culture that facilitates, and is unwilling to correct, the problems that Bank of America visited upon the Sundquists. Other courts have cited the decision. It has potentially useful implications regarding the efficacy of §§ 329(b) and 362(k) (1) as bankruptcy remedies.
To name and to shame Bank of America on the public record in an opinion that stays on the books serves a valuable purpose casting sunlight on practices that affect ordinary consumers. Other persons dealing with Bank of America will be able to gauge their experiences against what has been revealed in this case.