Stephanie DeYoung Whistle Blower Blog: "Hmm.. a False Statement in Kevin Padrick's Declatory Statement Under Penalty and Perjury?"

"There is a ton of inaccurate information in Kevin’s declaratory statement, but I can only post 1 at a time.

 You can find more answers by clicking here to read or view my deposition.

Click here for entire Declaratory Statement   

Why would I bring a tape recorder into the courtrooms when each and every hearing is taped?  These tapings are public and anyone can order them.  That is what I did, but Kevin wanted to try to discredit me in the court by saying I broke Court’s local rules.  I like how Kevin saves his tail by stating in his attorney language that “it appears to be an audio recording that she made during an official court hearing…”

Below is an email from the US Clerks Office:

“Attached is a scanned copy of the CD request by Stephanie Studebaker-DeYoung for the February 11 hearing in Summit Accommodators Inc.

vs. Inland Capital Corp., Case No. 09-3023. The order was submitted by Ms. Studebaker-DeYoung and filled by the court in May. I understand that Ms. Bjerk requested to know on July 17 whether anyone had ordered a recording of this hearing and, although the courtroom deputies searched the CD requests, they overlooked this one. I am very sorry that we did not give out the correct information.

I will notify Judge Dunn of the CD request to correct the erroneous impression that Ms. Studebaker-DeYoung violated court rules by making her own recording of the hearing without court permission.

I apologize again for the court’s failure to produce the information requested by Ms. Bjerk.

Charlene M. Hiss, Chief Deputy/Acting Clerk U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon

503-326-1571 charlene_hiss@orb.uscourts.gov

(See attached file: cd4studebakerdeyoung.pdf)
in Court Documents Submitted By Padrick's Attorney's at Tonkon Torp,Obsidian/Padrick,The Legal System Hard at Work|

Exhibit 1 – a Print out of a page on THIS SITE.

Exhibit 4 -THE POSTING page on THIS SITE.

Obsidian Finance Just Can’t Get Enough of THIS SITE
– See Obsidian Finance’s Web Stats!

Exhibit 6 – Includes Emails Between Terry Vance, Sussman Shank, Steve Hedberg, Annie Buell and Kevin Padrick

Email from Terry Vance to Kevin Padrick & Annie Buell regarding Concerns Terry was having about the case on January 22, 2009

Email From Susan Ford and Sussman Shank to Steve Hedburg atPerkins Coie. This is the email that per Kevin Padrick’s Presentation upset all the 1031 exchangers on February 6, 2009 "

Source of Above Quote and Full Post

http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/?cat=16

The Videos of the Meeting with Kevin Padrick

http://www.youtube.com/user/KevinPadrick?ob=0

Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox Posted the Above Videos

"The appointment of a chapter 11 trustee is an extraordinary measure" - and Don't Forget the Susan Ford, Sussman Shank Emails where she says appointing a Trustee is bad for Creditors. Yet Kevin Padrick's Clout, Connections, and Power got him the Trustee Job. Even though he was an "Insider" and seemingly by Law could not legally be the Trustee in the Summit Bankruptcy

"From: Mark Neuman <neumancpa@gmail.com>

To: Stephanie Studebaker-DeYoung <stephanie@studeycpa.com>
Cc: Crystal L. Cox <savvybroker@yahoo.com>;
Sent: Mon, February 22, 2010 2:26:14 PM
Subject: BK rules in appointing trustees

Please check out the attached.  This is a legal document from BK proceedings in The 1031 Tax Group, LLC case.  I've tried to highlight important parts to make it easy.  Under (Section 1104(a) of the Bankruptcy Code the court can appoint a BK trustee in place of to convert a debtor in possession (DIP) BK (which is exactly what the Summit case was) if:

1)  there is fraud, dishonesty, incompetence or gross mismanagement of the affairs by the debtor by the current management (didn't apply to Summit)
2)  such appointment is in the interests of the creditors (this is very arguable)

3)  if grounds exist to convert or dismiss the case (didn't apply to Summit)

It also says  and the it "should be the exception, rather than the rule".  "The decision to appoint a chapter 11 trustee is a factual determination entrusted to the discretion of the bankruptcy judge".

In Sharon Steel Corp "the standard gives the.... court discretion to appoint a trustee when doing so would serve the parties' and estate's interests".  In Ionosphere Clubs, Inc. the standard for appointment of a trustee should be...... "facilitation of a reorganizatoin that will benefit bothe the creditors and the debtors".

Courts have considered several factors including "the benefits derived by the appointment of a trustee, balanced against the cost of appointment".

This also refers to the fact that Ed Okun had proven "unreliable" and that the "level of distrust between the Debtors.... has only increased".

I think that if there was any higher level of distrust, it was only fueled by what Kevin Padrick was telling the creditors behind closed doors (like using the property lists we gave him to convince the creditors that they "found" all these assets).  And what actions did we take that created a level of distrust?  None other than helping!  The fact that we were working hard with Terry?

The fact that we actually got some properties sold?  The fact that we were trying to transfer all of our net worth but the attorneys got in the way and tried to make it impossible?  The fact that attorneys told us we could be prosecuted if we just transferred the assets because it would be a fraudulent transaction?

Steph- was there any mention of the considerations above when Dunn decided he would appoint a trustee?  Any discussion on the factors that have to be present?

To make sure the facts are clear, the Creditors' Committee counsel I believe made a motion to replace Terry as CRO with Kevin Padrick.  When there was resistance to that in court by the attorneys for the debtor, probably because Sussman knew they would get fired if Padrick was hired (Stephanie was at that hearing), the judge decided he would just appoint a trustee because no one could "agree".  Can the judge do that on the spot without any consideration of the law..... not even thinking through if the circumstances for him to do that under the law were present?

Was this pre-planned anyway between Padrick and Judge Dunn if someone objected?  And all of the sudden Sussman throws its support to Kevin- why??  Due to the deal they made to salvage the exchanger work if they supported Padrick?  Better than getting shut out completely?  Not for the best interests of the creditors?

Mark"

Click Here for Attached Document

Summit 1031 Bankruptcy Transparency Documents





More on the Summit Bankruptcy





My Blog on Obsidian Finance Group
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/

Summit Bankruptcy Whistle Blower Blog, NOT Mine
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/

Documents I gave the courts to prove the source of the post
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2011/12/in-obsidian-v-cox-i-provided.html

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/117800653/Obsidian-V-Cox-Trial-Transcripts

Meeting Videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/KevinPadrick

Court Filing Against Tonkon Torp and Obsidian Finance Group
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/98076240/David-Aman-Tonkon-Torp-for-Obsidian-Finance-Group-Trustee-Kevin-Padrick