"David Aman Committed Fraud on the Courts. David Aman knew that others brought up Tax Concerns Yet told Judge Marco Hernandez it was ONLY Me. Fraud on the Courts."
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/exhibit-f71.pdf
Click the Document Above and you See there were Issues brought up by Professionals inside the Summit Bankruptcy and Blogger Crystal Cox was Simply Reporting on the Issue.
Originally Posted On Obsidian Finance Sucks at
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2012/05/david-aman-committed-fraud-on-courts.html
"Kevin Padrick Illegally Seized Bank Account. Federal Trustee, Oregon Bankruptcy seems to be above the law and accountable to No One."
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE TRUSTEE AND COUNSEL VIOLATING PROVISIONS OF SEVERAL OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES RESPECTIVE OPERATING AGREEMENTS.
Archives from Summit1031BkJustice.com
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/120370872/Tonkon-Torp-Law-Firm-Perkins-Coie-Involved-in-Massive-Fraud-on-the-Courts
Originally Posted At
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2012/05/kevin-padrick-illegally-seized-bank.html
""Apparently, the Trustee believes that he somehow is not required to comply with the provisions of the Operating Agreement or Oregon law."
"E-MAIL TO:
DAVID AMAN
June 26, 2009
Re: Klondike Point, LLC
David:
This e‑mail is in response to your June 23, 2009 e‑mail to me with respect to Klondike Point, LLC (“Klondike”). I will respond, by separate e‑mail, to your comments regarding Century Drive Mobile Home Park, LLC.
By this e‑mail, we address (i) the management rights asserted by Liquidating Trustee Kevin Padrick (“Trustee”) with respect to Klondike, and (ii) the Trustee’s ignoring the offer made by Stephanie Studebaker to purchase the Trustee’s interests in Klondike.
- Trustee’s Purported Management Rights. By your e‑mail, on behalf of the Trustee, you provide to me a copy of a Memorandum of Action of the Members of Klondike, purporting to remove the Managers of Klondike and appointing the Trustee as the Manager of Klondike, and purporting to terminate my law firm as counsel for Klondike.
The Trustee’s actions in this regard are improper, and violate the provisions of the Operating Agreement of Klondike, as well as applicable Oregon law.
Ms. Studebaker and Barbara Tyler are the duly-appointed and acting Managers of Klondike, in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement of Klondike. Ms. Studebaker has acted as a Manger of Klondike since January 1, 2005, and Ms. Tyler has acted as a Manager of Klondike since January 1, 2009.
Klondike acknowledges that, pursuant to an order entered by the Bankruptcy Court in the Summit Chapter 11 case, Brian Stevens, Mark Neuman and Tim Larkin (collectively, “Summit Members”) transferred to the Summit estate their interests in Klondike.
The effect of the Summit Members’ transfer of their interests in Klondike is very clear: they were able to transfer to the Summit estate only their economic interests in Klondike, and not any management rights or other rights as members of Klondike. In this regard, please take note of the following:
The effect of the Summit Members’ transfer of their interests in Klondike is very clear: they were able to transfer to the Summit estate only their economic interests in Klondike, and not any management rights or other rights as members of Klondike. In this regard, please take note of the following:
- Section 8.1 of the Operating Agreement provides that any transfer of a member’s interest in Klondike is “prohibited,” and that no member may transfer his interest in Klondike.
Section 8.3.1 of the Operating Agreement provides that the transferee of a member’s interest will not be admitted as a substitute member without the unanimous written consent of the non‑transferring members. Such consent has not been obtained by the Trustee, and will not be given either by Ms. Studebaker or by Ms. Tyler. - Oregon law is clear that the Summit Members’ transfer of their interests to the Trustee allows the Trustee to have recourse only to the members’ economic interests in Klondike, and that the Trustee does not become, as a result of such transfer, a member in Klondike or obtain any right to participate in the governance of Klondike. See, O.R.S. 63.259 (“Rights of judgment creditor against a member.
On application to a court of competent jurisdiction by any judgment creditor of a member, the court may charge the membership interest of the member with payment of the unsatisfied amount of the judgment with interest. To the extent so charged, the judgment creditor has only the rights of an assignee of the membership interest.”).
The Trustee has no greater rights with respect to Klondike than he has under the Operating Agreement and under applicable Oregon law. See, Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48 (1979). - Pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Operating Agreement, a Manager for Klondike may be elected and removed by a vote of members owning not less than 60% of the ownership interests in Klondike. By the Memorandum of Action, the Trustee asserts that he holds 63.32% of the ownership interests in Klondike, and, accordingly, that he is entitled to appoint himself as Manager.
As set forth hereinabove, pursuant to the Operating Agreement and governing Oregon law, the Trustee has no right to vote the interests that were assigned to him by the Summit Members.
However, even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Trustee were entitled to vote the interests of the Summit Members, the Trustee still would not have the requisite votes to appoint himself as the Manager of Klondike.
While it may be correct that the Summit Members had at one point an aggregate of 63.32% of the ownership interests in Klondike, they no longer have such ownership interests.
By reason of the Summit Members’ failure to make required capital contributions, as of April 30, 2009, the Summit Members had only 58.07% of the ownership interests in Klondike, and Ms. Studebaker and Ms. Tyler had 41.93% of the ownership interests in Klondike.
Transmitted for your review is a chart, prepared by Ms. Studebaker, setting forth the ownership interest changes that occurred by reason of the Summit Members’ failure to make the required capital contributions.
Based upon the foregoing, pursuant to the Operating Agreement, the Trustee is not entitled to vote as a member of Klondike, and is not entitled to exercise any management rights under the Operating Agreement.
Governing Oregon law is consistent with this result. Moreover, even if the Trustee had the right to participate in the governance of Klondike ‑‑ and he does not ‑‑ he does not control the percentage of ownership interests in Klondike necessary to appoint himself Manager. The Trustee’s attempt to seize control of management of Klondike, therefore, is blatantly improper, violates the rights of the members of Klondike, and is ineffective.[1]
Governing Oregon law is consistent with this result. Moreover, even if the Trustee had the right to participate in the governance of Klondike ‑‑ and he does not ‑‑ he does not control the percentage of ownership interests in Klondike necessary to appoint himself Manager. The Trustee’s attempt to seize control of management of Klondike, therefore, is blatantly improper, violates the rights of the members of Klondike, and is ineffective.[1]
- Trustee’s Improper Disregard of Purchase Offer. As pointed out in my June 3, 2009 letter toLeon Simson of your office, the Summit Members’ failure to make capital contributions required pursuant to Section 3.3 of the Operating Agreement constitutes a “cessation event” pursuant to Section 9.1(e) of the Operating Agreement.
Moreover, pursuant to Section 9.1(g) of the Operating Agreement, the Summit Members’ bankruptcies, as such term is defined in O.R.S. 63.001(3) (“bankruptcy” includes a member’s “seeking, consenting to or acquiescing in the appointment of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of the member or of all or any substantial part of the member’s properties”) also constitutes a cessation event.
Pursuant to Section 9.3 of the Operating Agreement, upon the occurrence of a cessation event as to a member of Klondike, the remaining members of Klondike may elect to purchase the units owned by the affected members on the terms set forth in Section 9.5 of the Operating Agreement, at 80% of the value of such units, in accordance with the valuation procedures established by Section 9.4 of the Operating Agreement.
As set forth in my June 3, 2009 e‑mail to Mr. Simson, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 9.3, 9.4 and 9.5 of the Operating Agreement, in April 2009, Ms. Studebaker sent to the Summit Members an offer to purchase their respective interests in Klondike (“Purchase Offer”).
On April 20, 2009, Ms. Studebaker’s counsel sent to Mr. Simson, by overnight mail, a copy of Purchase Offer. By the Purchase Offer, Ms. Studebaker provided to the Trustee extensive information regarding the subject real property and regarding Klondike’s financial affairs in order to facilitate the Trustee’s ability to evaluate the fairness of the Purchase Offer.
By the Purchase Offer, Ms. Studebaker offered to purchase the Summit Members’ interests for an amount in excess of any legitimate valuation of such interests. Ms. Studebaker’s offer is a fair offer and should be pursued by the Trustee for the benefit of the Summit creditors.
On April 20, 2009, Ms. Studebaker’s counsel sent to Mr. Simson, by overnight mail, a copy of Purchase Offer. By the Purchase Offer, Ms. Studebaker provided to the Trustee extensive information regarding the subject real property and regarding Klondike’s financial affairs in order to facilitate the Trustee’s ability to evaluate the fairness of the Purchase Offer.
By the Purchase Offer, Ms. Studebaker offered to purchase the Summit Members’ interests for an amount in excess of any legitimate valuation of such interests. Ms. Studebaker’s offer is a fair offer and should be pursued by the Trustee for the benefit of the Summit creditors.
For the past several months, Ms. Studebaker has continued to act diligently, and in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement, to purchase the interests of the Summit Members which have been transferred to the Trustee.
While the Trustee received Ms. Studebaker’s Purchase Offer more than two months ago, he has not bothered to even respond to her Purchase Offer. Moreover, he has not bothered to respond substantively to my June 3, 2009 e‑mail to Mr. Simson, requesting the Trustee’s cooperation, in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement, regarding the Purchase Offer.
Instead, the Trustee has chosen to employ this brazen “power play,” asserting rights to which he clearly is not entitled under the Operating Agreement or under Oregon law.
Apparently, the Trustee believes that he somehow is not required to comply with the provisions of the Operating Agreement or Oregon law.
While the Trustee received Ms. Studebaker’s Purchase Offer more than two months ago, he has not bothered to even respond to her Purchase Offer. Moreover, he has not bothered to respond substantively to my June 3, 2009 e‑mail to Mr. Simson, requesting the Trustee’s cooperation, in accordance with the provisions of the Operating Agreement, regarding the Purchase Offer.
Instead, the Trustee has chosen to employ this brazen “power play,” asserting rights to which he clearly is not entitled under the Operating Agreement or under Oregon law.
Apparently, the Trustee believes that he somehow is not required to comply with the provisions of the Operating Agreement or Oregon law.
The Trustee’s blatant disregard of the rights of the Klondike members will not be tolerated by them. We hereby demand that the Trustee cause you to rescind your June 23, 2009 e‑mail and to acknowledge that Ms. Studebaker and Ms. Tyler continue to act as the Managers of Klondike. We demand further that the Trustee address Ms. Studebaker’s Purchase Offer, in accordance with the requirements of the Operating Agreement.
If the Trustee does not respond to this e‑mail by July 2, 2009, Klondike will consider pursuing all appropriate remedies against the Trustee. The Trustee then will have an opportunity to explain to the Bankruptcy Court why he apparently is intent on exceeding his duties as a trustee and on ignoring opportunities to maximize the value of estate assets, to the detriment of the Summit creditors, and to justify to the Bankruptcy Court and to the Summit creditors the value of his services in this regard.
If the Trustee does not respond to this e‑mail by July 2, 2009, Klondike will consider pursuing all appropriate remedies against the Trustee. The Trustee then will have an opportunity to explain to the Bankruptcy Court why he apparently is intent on exceeding his duties as a trustee and on ignoring opportunities to maximize the value of estate assets, to the detriment of the Summit creditors, and to justify to the Bankruptcy Court and to the Summit creditors the value of his services in this regard.
Robert E. Opera
REO:pbw
[1] I recall that, when the issue of the Trustee’s rights and remedies, as the transferee of the Summit Members’ interests, was raised before the Bankruptcy Court at the April 30, 2009 hearing on the Trustee’s motion to expedite the hearing on his summary judgment motion, the Bankruptcy Court acknowledged, inclear and unequivocal terms, the validity of Klondike’s position regarding the limited rights obtained by the Trustee as a result of such transfer. The Trustee’s acts, then, are directly inconsistent with the Bankruptcy Court’s comments."
Source of Above Quotehttp://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/?page_id=2029
Note from Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox, I have been writing on this case from the begining, I believe that the Public has a right to know what goes on in the bankruptcy courts and the victims involved have a right to transparency in all aspects of how THEIR MONEY is being used by the Bankruptcy Trustee.
This is an "after the fact" situation, whereby a company goes bankrupt and the victims that lose money then seem to have no rights. This bankruptcy was a bit different in a way of it involve a large amount of people in many states, and they were mostly just people, vs companies and vendors which are usually involved in a bankruptcy. This was a 1031 Exchange Company in which had the money of many real estate investors, this was their life's savings, life's work and after the bankruptcy filing the money was in the control of Kevin Padrick, Bankruptcy Trustee as far as I understand it.
This is an "after the fact" situation, whereby a company goes bankrupt and the victims that lose money then seem to have no rights. This bankruptcy was a bit different in a way of it involve a large amount of people in many states, and they were mostly just people, vs companies and vendors which are usually involved in a bankruptcy. This was a 1031 Exchange Company in which had the money of many real estate investors, this was their life's savings, life's work and after the bankruptcy filing the money was in the control of Kevin Padrick, Bankruptcy Trustee as far as I understand it.
My goal was to get the details of this case found as there was an insider who had, has an amazing blog with lots of inside documents and there was a legal proceeding filed to object to the outrageous fees the trustee was charging the estate. I wanted to get this story heard and yes I formulated my own opinion along the way of the incredible, shocking events that transpired.
Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group hired the same attorney in that blog, same attorney that deposed those in the Summit Bankruptcy and from Tonkon Torp in which was named in the legal proceeding (Objection to Fees) in which I had been writing on, Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group hired David Aman to Sue me for Defamation for a blog post in which Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group nor David Aman of Tonkon Torp ever asked me to remove nor provided information to whether Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group paid the deferred gain on Klondike Point and Century Drive, which was all they had to do. Ask me to change or drop the post, show me ANY evidence as to why and I certainly would have, this NEVER happened.
So they sued me in January of 2011, and now my Trial is at the End of Nov. 2011, and All I did was tell the story of other people. And post a link to that blog for tons more information for the reader to look into. It is my believe that Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group simply wanted to silence my blogs as I am very good at Search Engine Marketing and use this talent to get victims heard and to expose possible corruption in the court system.
Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group and David Aman of Tonkon Torp, IN MY OPINION have harassed me non-stop for over 10 months, and the point seems to be simply to own my blogs and to stop me from talking about this story that is not my story, just because I have the ability to take other people's story to the top of the search engines.
Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group already lost most of this case in a Summary Judgement, I am legally allowed to talk about this story, and yet Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group and his attorneys still want me to agree to stop posting and want blogs from me that are my intellectual property, and simply because I write on this story that they don't want you to know.
The Facts of this case are is the Blog Post True or Defamation, do I have a First Amendment write to have posted that blog post? The remedy was easy long ago to simply provide a request to remove the post and to provide factual reasons to do so. However instead Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group and David Aman their attorney seemed to think that wasting tax pay money, and filing frivolous 10 Million Dollar Lawsuits was a better way to go. Even though there seems to be no basis in actual law to have done so nor to continue doing so.
The Summit 1031 Bankruptcy still has tons of unanswered questions in my Opinion, however for now WE simply want to know did Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group pay the deferred gain or not? IS the information in that post True of Not? Does Crystal L. Cox, investigative blogger have a right to have posted this information on her blog or Not?
Originally Posted on Obsidian Finance Sucks at
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2011/11/apparently-trustee-believes-that-he.html
More information Regarding the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy and the Role of Tonkon Torp Law Firms Attorneys David Aman and Leon Simson, as well as Obsidian Finance Group's Kevin Padrick, Ewan Rose, Patty Whittington and David W. Brown.
http://www.objectiontofees.com/
http://www.obsidianfinancesucks.com/
http://www.kevinpadrick.com/
Click Below for Full Objection to the Fees of Kevin Padrick, Obsidian Finance Group and Tonkon Torp.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/98076240/David-Aman-Tonkon-Torp-for-Obsidian-Finance-Group-Trustee-Kevin-Padrick
No comments:
Post a Comment