<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss xmlns:a10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel xml:base="https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions/RSSJudgeSauls.aspx"><title>FLNB Opinions Feed - Judge Sauls Opinions</title><link>https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions/RSSJudgeSauls.aspx</link><description>This feed provides an RSS format for all published opinions of Judge Sauls.</description><managingEditor>webmaster@flnb.uscourts.gov</managingEditor><lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:27:04 -0400</lastBuildDate><category>FLNB Opinions</category><item><guid isPermaLink="false">86-07143</guid><link>https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions</link><title>86-07143 | REBECCA KAY SCOVIAC</title><description>The trustee’s objection to a creditor’s secured claim and motion to compel the creditor to turn over title to the automobile in which it claimed a purchase money security interest was granted because the security interest, notice of which had not been received by the tax collector's office within ten days of sale, could be avoided as preference.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Codes: 547, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 1987 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate><a10:updated>2026-04-20T13:27:04-04:00</a10:updated></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">86-02039</guid><link>https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions</link><title>86-02039 | ARTHUR (ART) EDWARD MOORE</title><description>A former wife’s complaint objecting to the dischargeability of certain debts under the marital settlement agreement incorporated in the dissolution decree was denied because the debtor-husband's obligation under the marital settlement agreement to hold the wife harmless as to certain debts was in the nature of the equitable settlement of property rights, rather than alimony or support, and thus was dischargeable.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Codes: 523, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description><pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 1987 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate><a10:updated>2026-04-20T13:27:04-04:00</a10:updated></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">86-02078</guid><link>https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions</link><title>86-02078 | WARD LAND CLEARING &amp; DRAINAGE, INC.</title><description>A surety’s motion for disbursement of monies due was granted (against a secured creditor’s objection and traverse to the surety's motion) because the surety's equitable subrogation claim to monies due for work completed did not constitute a “security interest” under the Uniform Commercial Code, and thus, compliance with Article 9 was unnecessary to preserve the surety's dominant right to the funds.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description><pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 1987 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate><a10:updated>2026-04-20T13:27:04-04:00</a10:updated></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">86-07080</guid><link>https://ecf.flnb.uscourts.gov/opinions</link><title>86-07080 | FRANKLIN CO.VISITING NURSE ASSN.INC</title><description>Motion of the highest bidder at a sale of the debtor's assets to set aside the sale was granted because of mutual mistake.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description><pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 1987 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate><a10:updated>2026-04-20T13:27:04-04:00</a10:updated></item></channel></rss>