American Credit Company v. Broach

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WILSON DIVISION
IN RE:
AMERICAN CREDIT COMPANY, 	Case No. 06-02189-8-JRL
Debtor.
AMERICAN CREDIT COMPANY,
Adversary Proceeding No.
Plaintiff, 	L-07-00104-8-AP
v.
DANNY BROACH,
Defendant.
ORDER
This case is before the court on a motion to dismiss filed by Danny Broach (“Defendant”).
On March 13, 2008, the court held a hearing on this matter in Wilson, North Carolina.
This bankruptcy court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this
proceeding 	pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 151, 157, and 1334, and the General Order of Reference
entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina on August 3,
1984. This is a core proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2), which this court may
hear and determine.
SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 20 day of March, 2008.
________________________________________
J. Rich Leonard
United States Bankruptcy Judge
____________________________________________________________
Case 07-00104-8-JRL Doc 35 Filed 03/20/08 Entered 03/20/08 14:12:54 Page 1 of 2

2
American Credit Company (“debtor”) filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition on July 21, 2006.
On September 26, 2007, the debtor instituted this adversary proceeding to avoid an alleged
fraudulent transfer in the amount of approximately $10,000.00 under 11 U.S.C. § 548(a) and recover
this transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), made applicable by Bankruptcy Rule
7012(b)(6), a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted, "unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of
his claim which would entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957). In making that
determination, the court must accept as true all pleaded allegations and view the complaint in the
light most favorable to the plaintiffs. Hatfill v. The New York Times Co., 416 F.3d 320, 329 (4th
Cir. 2005).
At the March 13, 2008 hearing on this matter, Defendant presented no argument that the
pleadings and facts set forth in the complaint filed by the debtor are insufficient to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted. Therefore, Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.
END OF DOCUMENT
Case 07-00104-8-JRL Doc 35 Filed 03/20/08 Entered 03/20/08 14:12:54 Page 2 of 2