.jpg)
State Court or Bankruptcy Court for the fraudulent
Only a trustee can proceed under 544.
When the trustee proceeds under 544 the trustee is usingtheCA CivilCodeSection 3439 to recover FTs.
Therefore, having purchase the right to pursue a FT from the trustee, you would use CCC 3439 directly.
Law Office of Peter M. Lively * Personal Financial Law Center I
11268 Washington Boulevard, Suite 203, Culver City, California 90230-4647
Telephone: (310) 391-2400* Toll Free: (800) 307-3328 * Fax: (310) 391-2462
On Monday, August 3, 2015 5:32 AM, "R Grace Rodriguez rgracelaw@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
Hey Steve:
Isn't this where sometimes the practical and the technical have to be considered. If you received an assignment from Trustee you step into the shoes of the Trustee. . . Trustee can sue in BK Court so why couldn't you? Its a simple assignment no? (Technical)
Then when you do so its possible then that the defendants coming into BK Court will actually consent in favor of a long protracted delay in state court (Practical considerations) before a judge who may or may not be as experienced with these kinds of matters? Its your chance to get luck and begin a discussion to settle the claim without any challenge to jurisdiction?
CEL: (818) 554-9922
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hey Steve:
Isn't this where sometimes the practical and the technical have to be
considered. If you received an assignment from Trustee you step into the
shoes of the Trustee. . . Trustee can sue in BK Court so why couldn't
you? Its a simple assignment no? (Technical)
Then when you do so its possible then that the defendants coming into BK
Court will actually consent in favor of a long protracted delay in state
court (Practical considerations) before a judge who may or may not be as
experienced with these kinds of matters? Its your chance to get luck and
begin a discussion to settle the claim without any challenge to
jurisdiction? Save everyone time and money by starting in the BK Court
first?
R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
Full service Real Estate Attorney &
California State Bar
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist
OFF: (818) 734-7223
CEL: (818) 554-9922
Hey Steve:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
There is definitely a stern problem which may be overcome if the defendant
does not play his/her cards correctly but there are other issues here.
Without seeing the actual thing that was bought it is hard to say what it
is that was bought.
The right to sue as if you are the Trustee is different than buying a state
law claim then trying to bring it as an AP.
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Take a look at Stern v Marshall and its progeny
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:40 AM, stephen burton stephenburtonlaw@yahoo.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Have a case where my client just acquired from the chapter 7 trustee the
>> right to pursue certain fraudulent transfer action against third parties
>> for valuable assets. Had the trustee brought the action it would have been
>> brought in bankruptcy court. Now that my client owns the right there is
>> apparently an issue whether the fraudulent transfer action can even be
>> brought in bankruptcy court any longer. The order is not clear. Is there
>> a jurisdiction issue where my client can now only bring the action in State
>> Court?
>>
>> Steve Burton
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
> exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
> reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
> message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
> attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
> message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
> constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
> be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
> purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
> Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
> letters containing the signature of a director.
>
>
>
There is definitely a stern problem which may be overcome if the defendant does not play his/her cards correctly but there are other issues here. Without seeing the actual thing that was bought it is hard to say what it is that was bought.The right to sue as if you are the Trustee is different than buying a state law claim then trying to bring it as an AP.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Take a look at Stern v Marshall and its progeny
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:40 AM, stephen burton stephenburtonlaw@yahoo.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Have a case where my client just acquired from the chapter 7 trustee the
> right to pursue certain fraudulent transfer action against third parties
> for valuable assets. Had the trustee brought the action it would have been
> brought in bankruptcy court. Now that my client owns the right there is
> apparently an issue whether the fraudulent transfer action can even be
> brought in bankruptcy court any longer. The order is not clear. Is there
> a jurisdiction issue where my client can now only bring the action in State
> Court?
>
> Steve Burton
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
Take a look at Stern v Marshall and its progenyOn Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:40 AM, stephen burton stephenburtonlaw@yahoo.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.