Skip to main content
· 11/3/1999

Helbling v. Williams (In Re Williams)

Citations

  • 240 B.R. 884
  • 1999 Bankr. LEXIS 1374
  • 35 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 37
  • 1999 WL 1005180

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that Paramount’s per se rule only applies to cases in which the mortgagor’s testimony is rebutted by a certificate of acknowledgement
  • holding thatParamount's per se rule only applies to cases in which the mortgagor's testimony is rebutted by a certificate of acknowledgement
  • recognizing that “every opinion in which [O.R.C. § 5301.234]has been considered” has found that statute should be applied prospectively only

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: David F. Snow

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.