.jpg)
Ch. 11: Using ex-spouse DSO obligation as consenting
It all depends on what she says during her deposition.
There was a case where Debtor's friend owed him money due to a secured loan
to fix an airplane. Debtor's friend testified during the deposition that he
would vote for in favor of the plan no matter how little he was paid
because he liked the guy. Court found him to be a nonstatutory insider.
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 Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:18 PM, cdcbaa cdcbaamailbox@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Mark:
>
> I agree, but don't believe too many judges would consider ex's relatives.
> I've seen to many that hate each other.
>
> It is a little weird, but some perceptive judges may see that if the ex
> has a support claim, the ex is better off to accept the plan, but ex's are
> not generally insiders, too much hate.
>
> d
>
> Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503
> 310-328-1001-voice
> [image: cid:part1.03050307.05030101@bklaw.com]
>
> On Aug 24, 2015, at 7:45 PM, 'Mark J. Markus' bklawr@yahoo.com [cdcbaa] cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Thanks. My concern was the use of the word "includes" in 101(31). That's
> not an all-inclusive list, so a judge could theoretically find an Ex to be
> an Insider regardless of the degree of consanguinity. (I really wanted to
> use that word)
>
> On 8/24/2015 6:08 PM, easky1@yahoo.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> Mark:
>
> you can use ex, if no kids. 101(31) insider relative 101(45) relative
> is within three degrees. debtor to child one degree, back up to ex is
> just two degrees.
>
> d
>
>
>
> --
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> *Mailing Address Only:*
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)332-1180 (fax)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California Board of
> Legal Specialization
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office
> of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for
> the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any
> disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is
> prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by
> the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
> communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used,
> and cannot be used, 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 in this communication.
>
>
>
It all depends on what she says during her deposition.money due to a secured loan to fix an airplane. Debtor's friend testified during the deposition that he would vote for in favor of the plan no matter how little he was paid because he liked the guy. Court found him to be a nonstatutory insider.Sincerely,Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
The post was migrated from Yahoo.