Chapter 7 and 911 Settlement

[olivies]

To the OP- thank you for serving. And I agree- I would absolutely take this to the press!

[SunshineGal]

All I can say is "wow"! I can't even imagine what you have been through!

I hope some of the posts have given you the confidence you need to win this battle. I would agree with Angelinacat, start with the judge in the law suit, and if all else fails take it to the press. I would probably also enlist the help of the congressmen and attorney general's office. I just fail to see where congress intended for something like this to be legal.

If you lose, I can see this headed all the way to the supreme court.

Best of luck and please keep us posted.

[AbbeyA]

Gwenn, thank you for your service to our country and preservation of our safety and freedom.

[Gwenfarr]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for all your posts, I didn't do anything spectacular at 911, the real heros to me will always be
the people of flight 93. Every other cop and fireman was out there doing the same as I was, not a big deal.
But thank you.

I got an email from my lawyer on the settlement saying this, see what you think:

<<
The trustees need to be informed pursuant to federal statute. Just because they are informed does not mean that they are entitled to any of your settlement proceeds. The judge in this case has a strong preference in having the settlement money go directly to the plaintiffs rather than any other potential lien holders. We are dealing with this issue in those plaintiffs cases who have workers compensation liens and have been very successful in getting many liens waived. Please email me or send me the letter you received from the trustee so we can take care of it. >>

I dont think having liens waived will work with this money grubbing a**hole. I am unsure if I should still write that letter to the judge and / or newspapers, or if I should just try and get a bankruptcy attorney... again..

[backtoschool]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for all your posts, I didn't do anything spectacular at 911, the real heros to me will always be
the people of flight 93. Every other cop and fireman was out there doing the same as I was, not a big deal.
But thank you.

I got an email from my lawyer on the settlement saying this, see what you think:

<<
The trustees need to be informed pursuant to federal statute. Just because they are informed does not mean that they are entitled to any of your settlement proceeds. The judge in this case has a strong preference in having the settlement money go directly to the plaintiffs rather than any other potential lien holders. We are dealing with this issue in those plaintiffs cases who have workers compensation liens and have been very successful in getting many liens waived. Please email me or send me the letter you received from the trustee so we can take care of it. >>

I dont think having liens waived will work with this money grubbing a**hole. I am unsure if I should still write that letter to the judge and / or newspapers, or if I should just try and get a bankruptcy attorney... again..

I definitely think you should write to the judge. The trustee is out of line, and this can be escalated. By going after your 9/11 settlement, the trustee is ignoring the spirit of "discharge". This is not property you hid, or had at the time of filing, and it is a special circumstance that the judge will be very sympathetic too. I also would go to the press, if only to have that as a backup plan.

I am happy to see you fighting for what is yours. You deserve that money.

[Gwenfarr]

Thanks back2school!

I've sent my attorney the letters, I will wait til he reads them and gives me an idea of what to do.
I think I will write up the letter to the judge and just hold it for a few days until I find out if that will do more harm than good.
I don't want to sound like a cry baby to the judge. Then again, it was my idea to talk to the press in the first place and that did wonders. Until I opened my mouth to David Caruso of the associated press the law firm told me to not talk to anyone. When he called me I was supposed to hang up, but he was running the story anyway without our side of it, so it worked out that I ran my big mouth.

We'll see.

[despritfreya]

Hi Guys,

I got an email from my lawyer on the settlement saying this:

The trustees need to be informed pursuant to federal statute. Just because they are informed does not mean that they are entitled to any of your settlement proceeds. The judge in this case has a strong preference in having the settlement money go directly to the plaintiffs rather than any other potential lien holders. We are dealing with this issue in those plaintiffs cases who have workers compensation liens and have been very successful in getting many liens waived. Please email me or send me the letter you received from the trustee so we can take care of it.

I dont think having liens waived will work. I am unsure if I should still write that letter to the judge and / or newspapers, or if I should just try and get a bankruptcy attorney... again..

I believe your settlement attny is talking about something completely different than a Trustee in a bankruptcy since a Trustee in bk is not dealing with "liens" on the settlement proceeds.

The media/letter writing campaign is a great idea but you really need to talk to a bk attny - and you need a good one, not one who works for a "mill operation".

Des

[Gwenfarr]

I just got another email from him, after I sent him the letters, this is what he states,

<<I'm in a depo in duluth I get back in town tomorrow. No need for press and hellerstein. All you have to do is object to his petition to reopen. You did nothing wrong. Your wtc case did not exist at the time you filed for bankruptcy so xxxx xxxxx is not entitled to anything. Judge will have to deny his petition. I am sure any judge will be sympathetic given the circumstances. Ill give xxxxxx a call as soon as I'm back>>

Xxxxx is the trustee. I figured I would have to object to re-opening the case, Before I go off half-cocked, I'll see what happens when he speaks to this trustee. It may well be that he is simply trying to see if he can squeeze some $ out of me and when he realizes there will be a fight he may decide it is not worth the effort. Worby, Groner, Edelman & Napoli Bern is a huge law firm, I'm sure they have BK specialists on their payroll, so Im gonna sit tight for now.

[backtoschool]

I just got another email from him, after I sent him the letters, this is what he states,

<<I'm in a depo in duluth I get back in town tomorrow. No need for press and hellerstein. All you have to do is object to his petition to reopen. You did nothing wrong. Your wtc case did not exist at the time you filed for bankruptcy so xxxx xxxxx is not entitled to anything. Judge will have to deny his petition. I am sure any judge will be sympathetic given the circumstances. Ill give krohn a call as soon as I'm back>>

Xxxxx is the trustee. I figured I would have to object to re-opening the case, Before I go off half-cocked, I'll see what happens when he speaks to this trustee. It may well be that he is simply trying to see if he can squeeze some $ out of me and when he realizes there will be a fight he may decide it is not worth the effort. Worby, Groner, Edelman & Napoli Bern is a huge law firm, I'm sure they have BK specialists on their payroll, so Im gonna sit tight for now.

I think the trustee is just looking for low hanging fruit, and will slither away when you fight back. In the nyc area, there are not going to be many (or any in my opinion) judges that will be sympathetic to the trustee's desire to reopen this case.

[AbbeyA]

Hopefully your anxiety and worry over this can be put to rest very soon -- once your attorney calls up the trustee. Hang in there!

[Gwenfarr]

Hi Guys,

Well I hope you are right! Thats what Im hoping for, because if he persists, I may have to opt out of the settlement. There would be no reason for me to be in it if I stand nothing to gain. I'll go to trial and hope for a bigger settlement so that I can get at least something when its all over and done with.

I'll keep you guys posted!

[Fallonedward]

So in this scenerio, if two years after discharge a parent dies and leaves you money do you have to to turn it over to the trustee

In response,

One must understand the Code and the role of a Trustee. The Trustee (no matter how wrong WE think he is) has a duty to administer assets. If he fails in that duty he can be sued by the creditors, His responsibility is to the creditors, not the debtor.

This is not an issue of a debtor's fraud. No one is seeking to revoke a discharge, which has a 1 year limitation. OP is caught in the middle of the Trustee's role, nothing more, nothing less.

An asset that was in existence at the time of the filing IS an asset of the Estate even if not known and/or not listed, no matter how innocent. 11 USC 541(a)(1). OP's cause of action was in existence when the case was filed.

If the case is closed before an asset is administered, "a case may be reopened in the court in which such case was closed to administer assets. . ." 11 USC 305(b). Bankruptcy Rule 5010 DOES NOT put a time limit on when a Motion to Reopen can be filed.

Again, the OP needs to find a way to protect the asset. Either there is an applicable exemption or there needs to be some government intervention to say "this is wrong and we are going to stand behind our 1st responders."

Des.

[pathfinders]

Fallonedward

I do not think that would be the case. It is I believe 181 days after your Discharge

[ccsjoe]

Gwen,

1. Thank you for serving.
2. Glad to hear your attorney wrote back something that does sound reasonable and seems like he will be on top of it. I think his approach should work without doing an all out press war.

You and all of us here certainly deserve to not be harassed after going through this, and in your case, with special circumstances.

[enuffznuff]

No, not if they died two years after.

But if an uncle you didn't know died the year before, and there was a valid will in effect at the time of his death, and he left you his fortune, but you didn't learn of this will until AFTER the bk...then yes, the trustee can go after it, because the CAUSE was before. At least that's my understanding. The asset was in existence.

If your parents die 2 years after, the asset wasn't yours until their death, thus was not in existence (it was not YOUR asset at the time of filing, it was your parents)