It is necessary to document the amount of skulduggery that is readily apparent to Congress and the Courts by providing authoritative commentary that is now becoming profuse throughout the land.
Any additional information others may have on the subject is welcomed.
Many distinguished parties are making remarks about the odd ways the Court's, the Dept of Justice are behaving, especially concerning cases in Delaware.
The WSJ Law Blog did a piece on the issue of Delaware's Corp dominance issues (
here )
ProPublic.org speaks of issues that seek to protect the Dept of Justice high up personnel being contrary to the new law that was designed to increase the scrutiny and accountability of our governmental entities, except of course, for the dear ole DOJ
The Book by UCLA Law Professor Lynn LoPucki on Courting Failure
How Competition for Big Cases is Corrupting our Bankruptcy Courts, is an authority's look at the corruptive influece of our courts becoming a commerical enterprise.
Senator John Cornyn of Texas battled about the LoPucki book with Delaware Senator Biden.
Senator Biden is, of course, conflicted, as Delaware gets a large part of their annual budget from other state corporations paying Delaware taxes.
As Senator Cronyn’s motivation(s) are the pursuits of each State keeping its own revenue and all courts remaining free from temptation to “court”; it is readily apparent what logic should prevail in a “chaste” world.
Senator Cornyn stated, in a diplomatic manner in an issue of the Legal Times ( here ),
“Of course, no one wants to believe that a federal judge would ever distort the law for any reason, let alone in order to improve the court’s docket”.
At the same time the Senator stated in the Legal Times, (June 6, 2005), article that the facts are what they are; as Senator Cornyn remarked;
“After all, picking a judge isn’t far from picking the verdict. What’s more, if debtor’s get to pick the jurisdiction, then bankruptcy courts have a disturbing incentive to compete with each other for major bankruptcy cases, by tilting their rulings in favor of corporate debtors and their attorneys.”
The 3rd Circuit Court of appeals, remarked that there is organized, sophisticated, bad faith behavior by attorney's is detrimental to the integrity of the system. This is due to the organized element now known as "Bankrutpcy Rings"
The 3rd Circuit addressed the issues of “bankruptcy rings”. In the matter of In re Arkansas Co., 798 F.2d 645 (3rd Cir. 08/13/1986), the Circuit remarked upon the fabric of the stabs to clean up errant efforts, after the fact, to circumvent the Code, by quoting the verity that Congress was well aware of the “reality” of how the system “truly” works. The Third Circuit tackled the issues of offensive applications by faulty § 327(a) and Rule 2014 affidavits as follows;
“It is significant that Congress chose to place the requirement of court approval for the employment of an attorney, accountant, or other professional by the creditors committee directly in the Bankruptcy Code in 1978. 11 U.S.C. § 1103(a). The legislative history makes clear that the 1978 Code was designed to eliminate the abuses and detrimental practices that had been found to prevail. Among such practices was the cronyism of the "bankruptcy ring" and attorney control of bankruptcy cases.
The 3rd Circuit also noted the Congressional awareness of the harsh reality of perpetual malfeasance by attorneys as the Circuit continued on Arkansas stating;
In fact, the House Report noted that "in practice . . . the bankruptcy system operates more for the benefit of attorneys than for the benefit of creditors." H.R. No. 595, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 92, reprinted in 1978 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 5963, 6053”
----------------------------------------------
In these modern days of Perjury prosecutions of Martha, Bonds, etc for making a false statement to an officer,,,,, how much more heinous will the public find the proof, by an authority that attorney's are lying under oath and getting millions in fees (that they are not entitled to if they tell the truth) and the "police" the Dept of Justice, utilize their power to protect the perpetrators of false hood and deception?
There are more than 100 felony violations in the eToys case. The law firms of MNAT and TBF have confessed to filing more than 34 false affidavits and deceiving the court.
Where are the prosecutions?
Where are the investigations?
The Delaware Dept of Justice refuses to even mention the name of the MNAT law firm in any briefings, much less mention their bad faith acts.
This problem is not just eToys alone, as you can see by the following;
A Dept of Justice Trial Attorney for the US Trustee Program went before Congress and stated that Director Friedman and Director White have done little to promote the Integrity of the US Trustee Program (
here )
Judge Judith Fitzgerald stated that Justice Dept silence aided fraud (
here ) (you will need to pan down to the W R Grace Tersigni issues and case where Judge Fitzgerald is shocked when the US Trustee representative says he was instructed not to tell the court anything. ( the story is also
here )
Another Judge reported to House Judiciary Committee that the US Trustee Program is not a "watchdog" , that it is a "pack of dogs" (
here ) Judge Cristol also remarked that it is not David v Goliath it is Goliath versus and ant.
A Judge in Michigan dealt with a case, like eToys, where all the previous judges and US Trustee refused to address Fraud on the Court issues. All previous court decisions in Matrix refused to have a hearing on fraud and the Judge remarked " The Courts have the inherent authority, and indeed a duty, to address fraud on the court issues" (case item attached as a file).
The Courts have also dealt with eToys where the case of In re Baron's used the eToys case to reopen a closed case due to Fraud on the Court. (Florida In re Baron's and Meryl Lanson
here ) ( when at the site do the keyword search for eToys, the Court states it agrees with the eToys decision that fraud on the court merits an extended time review.
Both the Delaware Dept of Justice and the Delaware Court has stated, despite the confessions to filing 34 false affidavits, that no perjury was documented. In Delaware, supplying a false affidavit is no big deal. (please see judge Walrath's Opinion page 52
here )
The 11th Circuit dealt with an issue where a Trustee tried to state that a false affidavit was not perjury if given voluntarily, the Judge in that case said such logic was absurd, "Lying under oath is lying under oath" (
here )
If you file bankruptcy and hide aunt Martha's gift of her great grandmothers ring you can go to jail for 4 or 5 years.
If you are an attorney, who becomes an Officer of the Court and steals a public entity to sell it to your regular clients,
you just pay a itsy bitsy fine and can even retaliate and punish the person who blew the whistle on you.
Throwing away the shareholders of a public company by planting your paid associate is just a perk a court appointed counsel can enjoy, especially when one of the law firms has a former partner who is the United States Attorney