interest.” Williams, 859 F.2d at 666. Because the trustee in that case was “attempting to collect money not owed to the estate[,]” he did not have the authority under the Code to bring the creditor claims, notwithstanding the assignment. Id. at 666-67. In discussing the benefits of court-approved assignment of creditor claims, the Court in In re CBI Holding remarked that “[allowing a debtor’s creditors to assign their claims for the benefit of the debtor’s estate permits debtors, creditors, and bankruptcy courts the flexibility in reorganizing or liquidating a debtor’s assets necessary to achieve efficient administration of the reorganization or liquidation.” 529 F.3d at 549 (emphasis added); see also Logan v. JKV Real Estate Servs. (In re Bogdan), 414 F.3d 507, 512-513 (4th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). Even where a trustee brings assigned claims,
holding that trustee may bring assigned creditor claims where estate is the real party in interest holding prospectively that a vendees interest in a real estate contract constitutes real estate within the meaning of the judgment lien statute holding that a lawsuit by a third party creditor against the estate is a core proceeding holding when both real property and contract rights are assigned assignee must both record under the real estate laws and file pursuant to article 9 holding witness not licensed as real estate appraiser could not testify as expert on real estate valuation where statute made it unlawful to engage in real estate appraisal without license