Bankruptcy Law Question

[mnsbc1921]

Jurisdiction

California

I'm being sued by the chapter 7 trustee for what they are claiming as fraudulent transfer between family members, which is not the case. I can settle for half the amount or spend a lot of money on attorney fees and eventually take it to court, but there is a chance the court may not agree with my situation. Should I settle? Is this a loser situation that I'm potentially throwing a lot of money at to prove it wasn't fraudulent and this money was owed to me?

 

[army judge]

Should I settle? Is this a loser situation that I'm potentially throwing a lot of money at to prove it wasn't fraudulent and this money was owed to me?

I suggest you consult two or three local bankruptcy lawyers who are familar with the nuances and polictics of your BK Court.

Generally speaking, its always useful to consider a settlement, and negotiate a better outcome.

 

[despritfreya]

You would have to give a bit more detail regarding the transfer but, in general, settling is better than litigating.

Des.

 

[adjusterjack]

How much money?
Details of the transfer?
Why couldn't you convince the trustee that it was legit before the lawsuit?

 

[army judge]

Should I settle?

A settlement could be construed by a federal prosecuor as a criminal act.

A settlment is usually a good idea, but in this case, not unless you HIRE an attorney.

There are judt too many unknowns, not for me, but for you!

 

[despritfreya]

@army judge - I would not worry about "criminal" aspects.

Fraudulent conveyance or transfer in OP's context is most likely nothing more than an unequal exchange for value. All the trustee wants is $$$$. He/she is not interested in a criminal referral unless either the transferor or transferee fails to work things out and plays games.

Also settling would have no impact on any unlikely criminal action because the 9019 compromise motion is going to state something like "the trustee alleges _____ and the debtor denies the allegation". The parties are settling a civil matter not a criminal one.

Des.

 

[army judge]

@army judge - I would not worry about "criminal" aspects.

Fraudulent conveyance or transfer in OP's context is most likely nothing more than an unequal exchange for value. All the trustee wants is $$$$. He/she is not interested in a criminal referral unless either the transferor or transferee fails to work things out and plays games.

Also settling would have no impact on any unlikely criminal action because the 9019 compromise motion is going to state something like "the trustee alleges _____ and the debtor denies the allegation". The parties are settling a civil matter not a criminal one.

Des.

Thanks Des, very logical, very sensible.