11th Circuit Says - Prominent Attorney And Judge Acted Improperly, Reverses Bankruptcy Sale

[laserhaas]

Source: Daily Business Review

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has reversed a bankruptcy sale, finding both U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Raymond Ray and prominent Fort Lauderdale bankruptcy attorney Chad Pugatch acted improperly.

The unanimous unsigned opinion Friday returned the case to of ordered a lower court to reverse an entire bankruptcy of a Deerfield Beach-based Global Energies LLC to bankruptcy court.

The panel said Pugatch of Rice Pugatch Robinson & Schiller knowingly provided false testimony in a deposition.

Lawyers involved in the case said emails provided by former Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler attorney Steven Lippman were crucial in reversing the case.




Read more: http://www.dailybusinessreview.com/id=1202667122155/11th-Circuit-Says-This-Prominent-Attorney-And-Judge-Acted-Improperly-Reverses-Bankruptcy-Sale-#

---

Rothstein, Vennes, Stanford, Tom Petters, Lancelot/ SkyBell, Palm Beach Links Capital, Marc Dreier and Okun 1031 Tax Group frauds - are all documented frauds, resulting in convictions; but most people (and main stream media) are totally obtuse to the fact that they are - actually - LINKED!

Senator Cornyn, in statements published by the Blog of Legal Times in an article titled "The Owe Us", stipulates that venality in the federal bankruptcy system is permitting people to chose a venue (assure a particular verdict). The Senator references issues raised by UCLA Law Professor Lynn LoPucki on "Courting Failure" How Competition for Large Bankruptcy Cases is Corrupting the Courts.

It is corruption by Romney, Bain Capital & Goldman Sachs, of the U.S. Courts;
which led to my suing them for Racketeering in case "Haas v Romney".

[laserhaas]

1. This is encouraging. Perry indicted, a Circuit Ct slapping down a Judge and Law firm too

Instills hope that justice may come in our case.

These are violations of Civil Rights (victims being denied a clean integrity of the judicial process) due to fraudulent documents by a Law Firm that believes it is above the law. In our case, the judges accepted confessions of multiple parties lying under oath (intentionally allowing it to stay before the court - even though they knew they were "caught&quot . But the judge said she didn't care -

had to get back to Tweeter!

[Grey]

2. Good work.... K&R

[msongs]

3. knowingly provided false testimony - there should be lots of jail time for this, right? nt

[valerief]

4. Bwahahahaha!

[laserhaas]

6. Isn't it a crying shame - that the integrity of the fed system of justice - is a joke?

[valerief]

8. Just like our Congress. nt

[laserhaas]

5. the bankruptcy system prtects its own

There are 21 United States Trustees (with the US Trustee program being a temlorary {needing annual approval of funding}) - over seeing all average 1.5 million bankruptcy cases.

If the DOJ UST program fails to turn a nlind eye toward good ole boy malfeasance

Then they'll all be out of a job the next year.

It is a formula disastorous!

[surrealAmerican]

7. That really does stand out.

There was a word for that: "knowingly providing false testimony" ... it's perjury. If you or I did that, we would go to jail.

[laserhaas]

9. Correct - its Perjury and more

Techically it's fraud on the court by (approved) officers of tbe court. Per In re: Hazel Atlas Glass v Hartford Empire - U.S. Supreme Ct. (1944) - there's NO statute of limitations on such (because it is an assault on the integrity of the judicial process).

If you want to know more about such;
simply Google keywords "John Gellene".

[happyslug]

10. Here is the actual opinion

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201311666.pdf

The attorney for CHRISPUS VENTURE CAPITAL, LLC,l looks like he will lose his license over this, he knew his client was lying and never brought that up to the court. That is a violation of the Florida Rules of Ethics and grounds to be disbarred.


As to the Trial Judge, the 11th Circuit only claims he applied the wrong law to the facts:

The bankruptcy court reached the opposite conclusion by, at least in part, applying the wrong legal standard to Wortley’s Rule 60(b)(2) motion. Instead of considering whether the June 17–19 emails were new evidence, the court askedwhether Wortley had presented a new issue in his Rule 60(b)(2) motion. Because Wortley previously had suspected bad faith by Chrispus and had raised that issue in his motions to dismiss, the court held that the June 17–19 emails suggesting collusion did not warrant Rule 60(b)(2) relief. In the court’s words, Wortley “had his day in court.”

Later on the 11th Circuit pointed out that Wortley action did comply with the Rules:

Under any of those possible interpretations of the bankruptcy court’s statements, however, the court committed clear errors of judgment. First, Wortley discovered the June 17–19 emails in March 2012, well after the bankruptcy court denied with prejudice his motion to dismiss the bankruptcy petition. Second, before March 2012, Wortley did exercise due diligence in trying to discover the messages and had asked for precisely those types of emails in his initial document request to Chrispus. Although the email messages were indisputably responsive to that request, relevant to Wortley’s claims, and nonprivileged, Chrispus did not produce them. Because they were not listed on a privilege log, Wortley did not know the messages existed. He tried to obtain the same evidence through depositions of Juranitch and Tarrant, but both men denied any plan to file a bankruptcy petition in bad faith, sworn denials that now appear to be blatantly false.

[laserhaas]

11. Thanks - was planning on posting this today (couldn't do it through my cell phone).

Still doesn't mean Wortley will see justice;
but it is a great case for me to quote in "Haas v Romney".

In my case - we had so much evidence - the offending parties simply confessed (years later);
but the judge said she didn't want to hear it - had to get back to Tweeter!