Chapter 7 trustee Megan G. Heeg is the newest of the seven panel trustees in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division. The position was open due to Gregory Schott's resignation. The opening was not advertised on the U.S. Trustee web site. There's a good possibility that Megan G. Heeg was recommended for the position, or otherwise, waiting on a list -- just knocking down the door to become a chapter 7 trustee.

In adversary case number 02A7328, Megan Heeg hired old timer trustee Stephen G. Balsley as her attorney. This is one of several cases where the denial of due process by law is clearly orchestrated as a means by which trustees prevail.

Some cases in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division, demonstrate distinct patterns of operation. This web site is not secret to the trustees and some of the attorneys that collude with them. The more patterns of operation we report, the faster they change their methods to hide the intent of extortion and in some cases, embezzlement of all assets.

Complaints have been filed with the Executive Office of U.S. Trustees with evidence that the trustees abuse bankruptcy law. The Executive Office for U.S. Trustees holds Judge Manuel Barbosa, the only bankruptcy judge in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division, responsible. It makes no difference how much trustees abuse the law. The attitude of personnel with the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees is that if Judge Barbosa enters an order, then it's a judicial issue, and not a matter of trustees abusing the law.

The undue continuation of cases is another complaint. It is demonstrated in numerous cases, even those in which answers had been filed, that Judge Barbosa consistently schedules status hearings until defendants agree to settle.

Default judgments is the new method of deception under color of official right. It avoids complaints of threats, coercion, and trustees abusing the law. Default judgments allow bankruptcy trustees to place liens against property, and to order defendants to attend citations to testify of assets, depriving them of freedom and property without due process of law.

Judge Manuel Barbosa uses citations to threaten defendants with contempt of court unless they appear AND testify of assets. In at least two cases, both with default judgments in spite of the pro se, non-debtor defendants' participation throughout the hearings, Judge Barbosa attempted to thwart their right to appeal by holding the defendants in contempt of court, which forced them to appear in court and be deprived of their property without due process of law.

Personnel with the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees presents the public with excuses that victims of bankruptcy court corruption are those hiding assets and "disgruntled" for getting caught. They have also presented the picture, and attitude, that defendants fail to prevail in cases because they were not represented by legal counsel and thus, wanted to make their own law.

Their message is clear -- citing statute from the Bankruptcy Code is making your own law, because the bankruptcy judges, trustees, and EOUST legislate their own version of bankruptcy law in order to give color of official right to trustee perjury, conflicts of interest, extortion, and embezzlement.

In one case, the defendant is not an individual that the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees can present as hiding assets; making up their own law; not represented by legal counsel; neither disobeying bankruptcy law. The defendant is Singer Asset Finance Company, LLC. The debtor listed Singer as an unsecured creditor in her bankruptcy schedule. Its principal place of business, according to Stephen G. Balsley, attorney for the trustee, is in Boca Raton, Florida. There's nothing like having a defendant with its principal place of business in another state that is unaware that organized crime operates in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division.

For reasons unknown by Wells of Justice, Singer Asset Finance Company, LLC, retained legal counsel in Rockford -- one Daniel M. Donahue of McGreevy, Johnson & Williams. Daniel Donahue is also on the panel of chapter 7 trustees. From our observation, all panel trustees in the Western Division are very tight buddies. Based on the reports of two trustees to a reliable Chicago journalist, the "bankruptcy club" requires that they act according to plan, and the plan is to find ways under color of law to extort and embezzle.

For years, the bankruptcy club in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division mainly victimized debtors and co-owners of real estate property. Attorneys representing debtors, vulnerable to the club's retaliation, must avoid litigation and presenting law in favor of their clients. The club requires them to lead their clients into agreeing with settlements. If they cannot, then the club requires that they withdraw from the case or suffer retaliation.

Since about early 2002, we have seen a change of operation. Some trustees now appear to target non-debtors for extortion. In most cases we have examined where non-debtors are targeted, they are represented by attorneys that are either bankruptcy trustees, or employed with the law firm of a bankruptcy trustee. It's a win-win situation for the trustees.

Defendants, expecting to receive justice, instead receive a hefty legal bill. If they do not agree with the proposed settlement, they are abandoned by legal counsel. If any attorney or trustee in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division, desires to refute this allegation, please email us with the case number. Until then, we stand on the evidence in the adversary cases that we have examined since 1998 until present.

We are reporting this on May 25, 2003. The complaint against Singer was filed in December 2002. The case has been going on with continuations since that time. There are no documents filed in the case that raise a defense for Singer. We can undoubtedly say that Singer has been represented by legal counsel, because on May 15, 2003, Daniel Donahue motioned to withdraw from the case.

The day after his motion to withdraw, Stephen G. Balsley, attorney for trustee Megan Heeg, filed a motion for the entry of an order by default. How convenient.

Settlements are ways that the trustees use to avoid litigation on the merits. They are not appealable, since the court is only entering an order approving agreement between the parties. Default judgments also avoid litigation on the merits. As we can see from this case, Daniel Donahue, as attorney for Singer has had plenty of time to raise a defense. He did not do so.

In his motion to withdraw, Daniel Donahue alleges that he and Singer have a difference of opinion. Our question is what took him so long to know there was a difference of opinion? Certainly, Daniel Donahue must have known when he took the case that he could raise a defense for his clients. Most attorneys do not take cases they cannot win. Daniel Donahue withdraws, making it possible for the trustee to request a default judgment. Either by way of settlement, or by way of default judgment, the trustees' plans of extortion prevail.

Default judgments are becoming the popular way of giving color of official right to extortion. Judge Manuel Barbosa, the only bankruptcy judge in the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division, violates all case law pertaining to pro se litigates. He enters default judgments, in spite of how many pleadings pro se defendants file, and how many times they appear in court. In cases where there is no attorney to collude with the trustees, Judge Barbosa denies answers filed pro se, and enters default judgments. Since about early 2002, in cases where attorneys that are also trustees represent defendants, answers are not filed.

The conditions in which we see these default order operate is intentional to deny due process. Any defendant that is represented by legal counsel should not be faced with motions for default orders. This is also happening in adversary case number 00 A 7037, bankruptcy case number 99-53779. In this case, the debtor-defendant is represented by attorney Brad Waller, who is also a bankruptcy trustee in another division. The attorney has not filed one document in the case, and now the trustee is going after a default judgment against a debtor who has had open heart surgery, a stroke, and cannot physically appear in court.

Daniel Donahue, the same person who represented Singer, is the trustee in this case. He is about $3,000 short of having enough money to pay all claims in the case. This does not take into consideration accumulated interest on $33,000 turned over by the debtor since the year 2000. However, trustee Donahue wants another $17,000, or he will deny the debtor's discharge of debts.

The trustee wants to deny the debtor's discharge for failure to pay the balance of a COMPROMISE. This is not a matter of the court finding the debtor guilty or innocent of the trustee's allegations. The trustee, Daniel M. Donahue, does not want to consider that since coerced into the compromise, the debtor has suffered major illness and divorce. There is also something else ----

This case was filed jointly by the debtor and his wife, who has since become the debtor's ex-wife. The trustee, Daniel Donahue, has not required the other party of the joint case to appear in court. He is not holding the other party of the joint case responsible for any amount of the coerced compromise. Keeping with their pattern, the trustees, with the participation of Judge Barbosa, always choose the party they feel is the most vulnerable and unable to stand under the trauma of legal abuse.

On February 25, 2004, bankruptcy trustee Daniel Donahue filed a Final Report in bankruptcy case 99-53779. He reports a total of $34,191.37 in assets. Interestingly, Bank of America filed an unsecured claim in this case for $2,601.46. The bankruptcy trustee deposited the assets in this case with Bank of America.

Out of the $34,191.37, bankruptcy trustee Daniel Donahue was paid $4,169.14 in compensation. The law firm in which he works was hired as his attorney. That firm, McGreevy, Johnson & Williams, received $20,000 in attorney fees, and $354.65 for expenses, for a total of $24,523.79 deducted from the assets purportedly collected "for the benefit of creditors." The remaining $9,601.40 was distributed to unsecured creditors, with the trustee denying claims for approximately $22,000.