Posted on 05/16/2012 6:06:52 AM PDT by Beaten Valve
The bankruptcy case against 'Octomom' Nadya Suleman has been thrown out of court, official records show.
The mother of 14 failed to complete the necessary paperwork by Monday's deadline showing that she could not pay off her debts.
Creditors can now resume efforts to collect their debts from Suleman, and foreclosure proceedings can resume on her rented La Habra home.
The bankruptcy filing had put a temporary freeze on a foreclosure auction of Suleman's house.
The home was supposed to go on the auction block at Orange City Hall on May 7, but it was put on hold until May 21.
The house is expected to sell in the $400,000 range.
Suleman filed for bankruptcy on April 30, just one month after going on welfare to support herself and her 14 children.
In court documents reviewed by the Orange County Register, Suleman said she had $50,000 in assets and up to $1 million in debts.
(Excerpt) Read more at ktla.com ...
Idiocy in the extreme. When will the children be placed in sane, responsible, loving homes?
Can a nude spread in Playboy magazine be far behind?
Who loans a million bucks to a welfare mom with a couple dozen kids, no assets and absolutely zero work history?
You got 14 lovely children,
No proud father knockin at your door,
yeah but every hungry woman,
Has been in your place before...
Allman Bros, 1969
I know some absolute walking cretins who still managed not to screw-up their own bankruptcy filing. This woman is a real piece of debris.
“Can a nude spread in Playboy magazine be far behind?”
You must have missed it, she went straight to Porn.
http://www.inquisitr.com/231618/octomom-excited-for-her-first-porn-release-photo/
How does one foreclose on a RENTED house?? On the contents, yes.....but the house???
I believe that she has a "rent-to-buy" deal, but she defaulted on her payments long ago. The owner has been trying to take back possession of the house...
The woman has issues. She’s been on HLN with Doctor What’s-his-name several times, and when he interviews her, he politely and repeatedly reminds her to “focus” on the question under discussion because she seems to go off on lengthy tangents otherwise. The children....
That’s a disturbing mental image, isn’t it? Yuk. That skank’s bad/horrid/ugly enough with clothes on.
Yeah, somehow I managed to miss that.
I (thought I) was being satirical.
Turns out, I'm just behind the times.
Ah...that makes sense. Poor reporting, though, not to have included that clarification in the article itself. And the editing was also lacking, in not catching and correcting that. Today's crop of "journalists" seem to be severely lacking in many areas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.