Section 1104 - Appointment of trustee or examiner

3 Citing briefs

  1. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Byers et al

    MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 70 MOTION to Authorize Modification of Preliminary Injunction.. Document

    Filed October 30, 2008

    In a case under Chapter 11, to the extent there is cause for the appointment of a trustee, which in this case there clearly is under section 1104(a)(1) (providing that the court shall order the appointment of a trustee “for cause, including fraud, dishonesty… or gross mismanagement of the debtor” or “if such appointment is in the bets interests of creditors, any equity security holders and other interests of the estate…”), the UST appoints a trustee, see 11 U.S.C. § 1104(d), and the creditors may elect a trustee. See 11 U.S.C. § 1104(b)(2). In this regard, the Amended Receiver Order attempts an end-run around these established procedures enumerated in the Bankruptcy Code.

  2. In Re: Hoti Enterprises, L.P.

    MEMORANDUM DECISION:The bankruptcy court's June 19, 2012, Confirmation Order and July 16, 2012, Reconsideration Order are AFFIRMED. GECMC's motions to dismiss the August 10 Contempt Order, September 14 Contempt Order, and Chapter 11 Trustee Order are GRANTED with prejudice. GECMC's motion to dismiss the December 5 Contempt Order is GRANTED with prejudice as to the debtors and individuals Violeta Dedvukaj, Marash Dedvukaj, Gjelosh Dedvukaj, and Maruka Dedvukaj, and DENIED as to Victor Dedvukaj. Upon consideration of the merits of Mr. Dedvukajs appeal from the December 5 Contempt Order, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the bankruptcy court. The Clerk is instructed to terminate these appeals and close these cases.

    Filed April 26, 2013

    These same findings apply to the issuance of the Chapter 11 Trustee Order. Case 7:12-cv-08030-VB Document 12 Filed 04/26/13 Page 34 of 36 35 Last, with respect to the December 5 Contempt Order, the Court finds (1) the Confirmation Order and August 10 Contempt Order were clear and unambiguous as set forth above, the Chapter 11 Trustee Order was clear and unambiguous in directing the appointment of a trustee and directing that the debtors and “Victor Dedvukaj, shall have no authority or right to take any action on behalf of, or represent the interests of, either of the Debtors or their respective estates, having been relieved of such authority and right under 11 U.S.C. § 1104(a),” (2) Mr. Dedvukaj’s non-compliance is evident from his application for the October 16 TRO,9 and (3) Mr. Dedvukaj was not reasonably diligent in attempting to comply with any of these orders as evidenced by his repeated willful actions taken in contravention of the bankruptcy court’s orders. The Court agrees with GECMC that Mr. Dedvukaj was given repeated opportunities to voluntarily come into compliance with the bankruptcy court’s orders but chose not to.

  3. In Re: Hoti Enterprises, L.P.

    MEMORANDUM DECISION:The bankruptcy court's June 19, 2012, Confirmation Order and July 16, 2012, Reconsideration Order are AFFIRMED. GECMC's motions to dismiss the August 10 Contempt Order, September 14 Contempt Order, and Chapter 11 Trustee Order are GRANTED with prejudice. GECMC's motion to dismiss the December 5 Contempt Order is GRANTED with prejudice as to the debtors and individuals Violeta Dedvukaj, Marash Dedvukaj, Gjelosh Dedvukaj, and Maruka Dedvukaj, and DENIED as to Victor Dedvukaj. Upon consideration of the merits of Mr. Dedvukajs appeal from the December 5 Contempt Order, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the bankruptcy court. The Clerk is instructed to terminate these appeals and close these cases.

    Filed April 26, 2013

    These same findings apply to the issuance of the Chapter 11 Trustee Order. Case 7:12-cv-08758-VB Document 20 Filed 04/26/13 Page 34 of 36 35 Last, with respect to the December 5 Contempt Order, the Court finds (1) the Confirmation Order and August 10 Contempt Order were clear and unambiguous as set forth above, the Chapter 11 Trustee Order was clear and unambiguous in directing the appointment of a trustee and directing that the debtors and “Victor Dedvukaj, shall have no authority or right to take any action on behalf of, or represent the interests of, either of the Debtors or their respective estates, having been relieved of such authority and right under 11 U.S.C. § 1104(a),” (2) Mr. Dedvukaj’s non-compliance is evident from his application for the October 16 TRO,9 and (3) Mr. Dedvukaj was not reasonably diligent in attempting to comply with any of these orders as evidenced by his repeated willful actions taken in contravention of the bankruptcy court’s orders. The Court agrees with GECMC that Mr. Dedvukaj was given repeated opportunities to voluntarily come into compliance with the bankruptcy court’s orders but chose not to.