Unlawful Request

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" background="22dfd5a3.jpg"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="53" >Wells of Justice</FONT>     |     <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Times New Roman" ><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Wells of Justice"><U>Home</U></A></FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="purpose.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Our Purpose"><U><B>Our Purpose</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="cases.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Cases"><U><B>Cases</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="decisions.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Court Decisions"><U><B>Court Decisions</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="bpps.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Bankruptcy Petition Preparers"><U><B>Bankruptcy Petition Preparers</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="victims.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="For Victims"><U><B>For Victims</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="articles.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Articles"><U><B>Articles</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="letters.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Letters to Public Officials"><U><B>Letters to Public Officials</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="info.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Information"><U><B>Information</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="reports.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Reports"><U><B>Reports</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="rockford.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="About Rockford"><U><B>About Rockford</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="sitemap.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Site Map"><U><B>Site Map</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="links.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Informative Links"><U><B>Informative Links</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="contact.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Contact"><U><B>Contact</B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="22ed2043.jpg"> <div> <B><U>CASES</U></B></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="extortion.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Clear Case "><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">A Clear Case of Extortion</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><B>(</B>Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="system.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="System"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f099000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">A System Gone Wrong</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><B>(</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >Arkansas)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="abuse.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Abuse of Authority"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Abuse of Authority</B></U></A></div> <div> (Illinois) </div> <div> <A HREF="arizona.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Arizona"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Bankruptcy attorney indicted for embezzlement implicates Bankruptcy Judge and others.</B></U></A></div> <div> (Arizona)</div> <div> <A HREF="memphis.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Memphis"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Bankruptcy Court Corruption in Memphis</B></U></A></div> <div> (Tennessee)</div> <div> <A HREF="or_.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Corruption in OR"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Bankruptcy Court Corruption in Oregon</B></U></A></div> <div> <B><U><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"> </U></B><A HREF="betrayal.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Betrayal"><U><B>Betrayal</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois) </FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="charis.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Charis Hospital"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Charis Hospital</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Louisiana)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="conspiratorial.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Conspiratorial Behavior"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Conspiratorial Behavior</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="confidence.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Confidence Crime "><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Confidence Crime</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="confidence.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Confidence Crime "><U><B>Part 1</B></U></A><B> </B></div> <div> <A HREF="confidence2.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Confidence"><U><B>Part 2 </B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="confusing.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Confusing Issues"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Confusing Issues</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="itemized_billing_.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Billing"><U><B>(Billing)</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="defaults.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Default"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Default Orders</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="dd.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Doubledipping "><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Double-Dipping</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(California)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="longest.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Longest"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Longest Running Bankruptcy Case? </B></U></A><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(California)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="longest2.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part 2 Longest"><U><B>Part 2</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="fearing.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Fearing Couple"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Victims Lack Standing to Exercise Due Process </B></U></A><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(California)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="inslaw.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="inslaw"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Inslaw Case Series </B></U></A></div> <div> Widespread Corruption In The Federal Bankruptcy Courts </div> <div> <A HREF="polaroid.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Polaroid"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">What Happened to Polaroid?</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Massachusetts)</FONT></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="stealingland.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Stealing NonDebtor Owned Property"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Wing0a7300a700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Stealing Non-Debtor Owned Property</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="unlawful.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Unlawful Request"><U><B><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc99000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Unlawful Request</B></U></A><B> </B><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" >(Illinois)</FONT></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B><U>Unlawful Request</U></B><B>   </B><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#CC0033" FACE="Bookman Old Style" ><A HREF="#__april_19_2002_update___" TITLE="Unlawful Request"><U><B>- Updated-</B></U></A></FONT><B> </B></div> <bR> <div>   <B>Bankruptcy Case Number 99-50938.  </B></div> <div> <B>Adversary Case Numbers 00-07048 and 00-07116 </B></div> <bR> <div> The debtors filed for bankruptcy on March 26, 1999.  They received their discharge of debts on July 8, 1999.  The trustee, James Stevens, filed a motion for employment on June 17, 1999 that Judge Barbosa granted on July 14, 1999.  In general, when trustees file a motion for employment, they intend on recovering money in some fashion, whether by liquidating or extorting.  That's the way they earn  compensation.  </div> <bR> <div> After July 14, 1999, the case went into limbo.  There were absolutely no actions in it until June 2, 2000 when the trustee filed an adversary complaint.</div> <bR> <div> The adversary complaint alleges that the debtors owned a 1993 Ford Aerostar van that they listed as being worth $6,000.  They took their $1,200 exemption on the vehicle.  The complaint also alleges that the debtors owned furs and jewelry valued at $5,000, that they took a $1, 097.75 exemption on.  The trustee alleges that since the Section 341 Meeting, (that was held on April 29, 1999), he had been working with the attorney for the debtors to get appraisals.  The trustee states that the debtors provided appraisals for the furs and jewelry, but had not responded to his "<I>request for information concerning the 1993 Ford Aerostar Van</I>."</div> <bR> <div> It is puzzling that the trustee would claim working with the attorney for the debtors concerning the furs and jewelry, but then state that the debtors, (not their attorney), had not responded to his request for information concerning the vehicle.</div> <bR> <div> The attorney for the debtors in this case is Richard Jones, who was also attorney in the cases titled "<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000CC" FACE="Bookman Old Style" >Abuse of Authority</FONT>" and "<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000CC" FACE="Bookman Old Style" >Confusing Issues</FONT>."  His client in <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000CC" FACE="Bookman Old Style" >Abuse of Authority</FONT> testifies, and entered in case documents, that Richard Jones told him he was being "blackmailed" by the bankruptcy trustee.  In his response to the allegation, Richard Jones denies saying his client was being "blackmailed," while admitting he asked if he wanted to "<I>settle the matter</I>."  Hence, here we have another case involving Richard Jones for the debtors, where the trustee seems to be communicating with both Richard Jones and his clients, but claiming that the debtors are not responding.  Seems as if James Stevens was getting answers from Richard Jones about the furs and jewelry, he could also get information about the vehicle from Jones as well. </div> <bR> <div> In his adversary complaint, James Stevens alleges that he has made demand for turnover of the furs, jewelry and van, but all demands have been ignored.  In his complaint dated June 2, 2000, James Stevens asks the court for an order for the debtors to turnover the furs, jewelry and van to the trustee's office.</div> <bR> <div> Based on the docket sheet, and according to his pattern, Richard Jones never responded to James Steven's complaint.  There was a hearing on July 5, 2000, that continued until August 7, 2000, that continued until August 21, 2000.  What is interesting, as well as puzzling, is that the certificate of mailing for the adversary complaint filed June 2, 2000, is not entered on the docket sheet until AFTER the August 21, 2000 continuance. We wonder if the debtors were aware of what was happening.</div> <bR> <div> Keeping in mind that the last hearing on the docket sheet was scheduled for August 21, 2000, there is no record of a hearing taking place that day.  The next entry is an order entered by Judge Barbosa on September 6, 2000.  Based on the evidence from the docket sheet, the order was entered on a day when there was not a scheduled hearing.</div> <bR> <div> Judge Barbosa's order was for the debtors to turn over the 1993 Ford Aerostar van, and jewelry before September 14, 2000.  There is no mention in his order about the furs.  Maybe, by this time, the trustee realizes that the debtors' Schedules does not list furs, but only jewelry.</div> <bR> <div> On October 3, 2000, Richard Jones filed a motion to withdraw as attorney for one debtor only, who is the wife in the case.  Judge Barbosa granted his motion on October 16, 2000.  It never takes Judge Barbosa long to rule on motions to withdraw or motions to settle or compromise.  His order included that the debtor would have 21 days to obtain a new attorney.  A status hearing was scheduled for November 13, 2000.</div> <bR> <div> The clock ticks on. </div> <bR> <div>  From the docket sheet on the bankruptcy case, the hearing scheduled for November 13, 2000 was continued on December 11, 2000, which was continued on December 27, 2000.  However, before the December 11th hearing, an application to settle and compromise was entered by James Stevens on December 7, 2000.  The following day, he filed another adversary proceeding, number 00-07116 to revoke the discharge of debts for the husband only.</div> <bR> <div> True to form, on December 27, 2000, Judge Barbosa approved the application to settle.  It is in the trustee's latest adversary complaint that we see the revealing of some details.  </div> <div> (1)  It is noted by the trustee that the debtors turned over the jewelry.</div> <div> (2)  The debtors are now divorced</div> <div> (3)  The van was sold before they divorced</div> <bR> <div> The trustee alleges that the debtors were told he would be taking interest in the van.  We suppose the trustee did not tell them he didn't plan on taking interest in the van until a year after they filed for bankruptcy, however.  James Stevens continues in his adversary complaint by revealing that the wife in the joint case has agreed to pay half of the value of the van.  Please note that it was the wife Richard Jones withdrew from representing.  The one party of the joint case he still represents, is the party that James Stevens alleges is not cooperating, and should have his discharge of debts revoked pursuant to 11 USC 727 (d) (3)  </div> <bR> <div> We are not arguing if the debtors's actions were correct or incorrect in this case.  <B>Here's the point we want to make </B>….  </div> <div> According to 11 USC, Sec. 727(e),</div> <div> "<FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Bookman Old Style" ><I>The trustee, a creditor, or the United States trustee may request a revocation of a discharge -</I></FONT></div> <div> <I>under subsection (d) (1) of this section within one year after such discharge is granted; or</I></div> <div> <I>under subsection (d) (2) or (d) (3) of this section before the later of -</I></div> <div> <I>one year after the granting of such discharge; and</I></div> <div> <I>the date the case is closed</I><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Bookman Old Style" >."</FONT></div> <bR> <div> Based on bankruptcy law, trustee, James Stevens, has no lawful basis to request the revocation of a discharge in December 8, 2000, that was granted seventeen (17) months before his request to revoke.  True to form, Judge Manuel Barbosa allows the trustee's motion and the clock to tick on.</div> <bR> <div> There was a status hearing scheduled on January 17, 2001, that was continued on January 31, 2001, that was continued on March 5, 2001, that was continued on April 9, 2001.  In between time, James Stevens, through his attorney, Kathleen McCallister, filed a motion for default judgment on February 26, 2001.  This is a motion for default against the debtor who is still represented by legal counselor, Richard Jones!  </div> <bR> <div> The case goes into limbo.  Not only does Judge Manuel Barbosa not rule on the unlawful request to revoke the discharge of debts, (and it is unlawful because it was filed after one year after the entry of discharge in a case that was not closed), but he does not rule on the motion for default judgment either.  The clock ticks on ….</div> <bR> <div> On March 13, 2001, the debtor, apparently under the impression that his discharge could be revoked, agrees to a compromise that Judge Barbosa does not hesitate to approve, doing so on April 9, 2001.</div> <bR> <div> The use of threats under the color of official right, and Judge Barbosa's consistent neglect to rule, and particularly, based on law, is what leads people to agree to give money to the trustees to avoid consequences they are threatened with, even when those consequences are unlawful.   In this case, it would only be right for the debtors to agree to pay whatever proceeds they gained from the sale of the van that were in excess of their exemption.  However, we have a situation here of apparent separation, and divorce that was taking place while James Stevens alleges he was talking to the debtors' attorney, (but didn't know they were in the process of divorce.)</div> <bR> <div> We do not believe that the trustee spent a year asking for turnover of property before getting the court involved.  If he truly did, then he fails at performing his principal duty to "<I><B>collect and reduce to money the property of the estate for which he serves, and to close up the estate as expeditiously as is compatible with the best interests of the parties involved</B></I>."  (Excerpt from Senate Report 95-989)  </div> <bR> <div> The vehicle in this case is not a vintage car that increases in value.  The trustee never says how much the debtors sold it for, thereby not revealing if the $400 a month for six (6) months is reasonably based on the value of the van, or the proceeds that one debtor received from the sale of the van.  Remember that this is the compromise of one debtor.  The other debtor also made the same compromise arrangement that she has since defaulted on.  On October 9, 2001, Judge Manuel Barbosa ordered U.S. Marshalls to take the debtor into custody to bring her before the court.  There is nothing from the docket sheet revealing that this ever took place, and could have been an intimidation gesture to make sure the other debtor does not default.</div> <bR> <div> On March 13, 2001, bankruptcy trustee James Stevens, through his attorney Kathleen McCallister, asked Judge Barbosa to approve a motion hiring Miller Auction to sell the jewelry as "tag items," and pay him 12% commission on the gross sale.  While James Stevens demanded turnover of the jewelry based on a value of $5,000, Kathleen McCallister states in her motion to hire Miller Auction, that the jewelry was appraised for $2,600, and would only bring 50% to 65% of its value at resale.  The debtors' claimed an exemption of $1,097.76 on the jewelry.  Using the highest percentage, the sale of the jewelry would gross $1,690.  Less John Miller's 12% commission of $202.80, the value of the jewelry is less than the exemption declared by the debtors.</div> <bR> <div> This case is still pending, with no report being given on when and if the jewelry sold, or if the debtors have paid the compromise.  It's been almost a year.  The clock ticks on, and we see from the Schedules filed in the case that the debtors also owned a house with approximately $4,000 in equity.  The trustee might allow this case to remain open until there is more equity in the house whereby he can justify selling it  3 years, 4 years, 5 years, 10 years after the debtors have been declared bankrupt by federal law.</div> <bR> <div> <B> <A NAME="__april_19_2002_update___"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><B>- April 19, 2002 Update -</B><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Bookman Old Style" > </FONT></div> <div> Between the time we posted this report, until now, the trustee, James Stevens, has taken two actions.  He abandoned property and filed a Final Report in this case.  From his Final Report, it appears that some jewelry sold, netting $270.00.  The jewelry that didn't sell was returned to the Debtors.  With the $270.00, and payments made by the Debtors on the vehicle and interest,  the Trustee has <B>$5,106.43</B>.  Compensation and commission to himself and his lawfirm is <B>$4,616.39</B>.  That leaves <B>$490.04</B> to pay on debts.  The claims in this case total $10, 920.27.  That means that Creditors will receive approximately 4.49% of what is owed to them.</div> <bR> <div> As can be expected, the U.S. Trustee's office blames Debtors for the time the trustees spend in cases.  However, as evidenced in this case, the trustee waited approximately one year, and after the divorce of the Debtors, before demanding property.  Will the U.S. Trustee also take into consideration that the attorney for the Debtors, Richard Jones, withdrew representation from one of the Debtors also?  We doubt it.  Blaming Debtors is a way of justifying converting 95.51% of assets to the trustee's compensation.  Such circular excuses reveal the obvious, that is, if there was no personal financial benefit in it for the trustee, he would close the case before waiting a year to use the unlawful threat of revoking the discharge of debts.   </div> <bR> <div> Someone might say that the Debtors could have appealed Judge Barbosa's orders.  In answer to that, we remind you that the Debtor's attorney, Richard Jones, didn't object to the trustee's threat of revoking the discharge of debts, although he knows, or should know, that federal law limits revoke of discharge to one year.  In addition, we remind you that Richard Jones withdrew representation of one of the Debtors in a JOINT case.  Therefore, with attorneys like this, and the cost of legal and filing fees, appeal is not a realistic option.</div> <div> _____________________________________  <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#FF0000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><A HREF="unlawful_m.htm" TITLE="Unlawful Request"><U>Back to Top</U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>