.jpg)
trustee duty to inform debtor if making preference cl=
In my opinion the Trustee does not bring it up at 341 to avoid confrontation.
Jonathan D. Leventhal
Leventhal Law Group, P. C.
818-347-5800
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours.
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private, confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C. is a Debt Relief Agency under federal law.
Note: The Leventhal Law Group, P.C. does not reprenet you until a written fee agreement has been signed by you and a representative of the Leventhal Law Group, and all fees have been paid.
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: 08/13/2012 11:12 AM
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] trustee duty to inform debtor if making preference claim against creditor?
Larry and Jonathan have it right but in both my debtor and trustee practice I have thought a lot about what exactly are the boundaries of a Trustees duties to the Debtor, there are cases that talk about duties to the Debtor, -- In re Kay, 223 B.R. 816 (M.D. Fla. 1998) mentions fiduciary duty to the debtor. If anyone has a good article on that specific issue I would move to know about it
The post was migrated from Yahoo.