Court Rules for I.S. Law Firm Clients Against a Fraudulent Bankruptcy Petitioner
On May 16, 2013, J. Andrew Baxter, Senior Associate at I.S. Law Firm, represented a family swindled by an allegedly fraudulent real estate investment scheme in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Alexandria. At the close of the trial, Judge Kenney sided with the family, and denied discharge to the bankrupt party. This means that our clients will be able to pursue their claim and attempt to recover the money they lost, despite the fact that the perpetrator filed for bankruptcy.
Our clients contacted us after the debtor offered to invest the clients’ money, misused the money our clients invested, and then filed for bankruptcy when our clients threatened to file a lawsuit. Our clients, along with several other victims, had lost their life savings in a series of real estate transactions that our clients allege was a Ponzi scheme perpetrated by a con artist.
In many cases, there is not much a person or business legitimately owed money can do when a debtor files for bankruptcy. All claims against the bankruptcy debtor are automatically stopped while the bankruptcy petition is reviewed by the Court. If the debtor is successful, the Court will order a discharge of all debts, and those who are owed money stand no chance of recovery.
In the Bankruptcy Court trial, our attorneys proved that the debtor knowingly or fraudulently made false statements on the bankruptcy petition in violation of the law. Our lawyers successfully pursued our clients’ claims by presenting hundreds of pages of documents related to the complex fraud, and interrogating the alleged perpetrator of the scheme on the witness stand for over four hours. In the course of the trial, our attorney obtained valuable admissions and confessions from the debtor which resulted in the Court’s decision to deny the debtor a bankruptcy discharge.
As a result, the debtor was not permitted to use the bankruptcy process to wipe away the debts, and our clients obtained a realistic chance of recovering the money they lost.
<PLEASE NOTE THAT CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE. CASE RESULTS DESCRIBED BELOW DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE UNDERTAKEN BY I.S. LAW FIRM, PLLC.