Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Alex Jones's Bankruptcy Lawyer Indignant That Sandy Hook Plaintiffs Aren't Grateful He Spared Them
This a subchapter 5 case filed under Section 11 of the bankruptcy code. Bankruptcy in general is very favorable to the debtors and subchapter 5 is a new creation that strives to be even more favorable to the debtors. Only the debtor gets to propose a plan and there are a ton of limitations on some of the normal protection for creditors. This proceeding is limited to small bankruptcies with less than $7.5 million in debt Jones and Free Speech System are not party to this sham bankruptcy because they have too much debt. This bankruptcy is a stunt. The US Trustee actually file a motion calling this proceeding a sham
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsb.455827/gov.uscourts.txsb.455827.18.0.pdf
Why didn’t Alex Jones or FSS file for bankruptcy relief when Debtors did? They are both defendants in the same litigation as Debtors, and all of them have been found liable in those cases—in unliquidated amounts. Moreover, Debtors’ assets are estimated to be virtually nil for a case of this significance ($50,000), while Alex Jones and FSS are fully funding the administrative expenses of these bankruptcy cases without filing themselves. Why? It appears that Jones intends to leverage the bankruptcy filings of his holding companies to extend the automatic stays of pending litigation against Debtors to him and FSS, while he maintains full control of FSS and its assets going forward. Thus, this Motion to appoint the trustees for the Litigation Settlement Trust seems to be just the first step for Debtors to carry out Jones’s and FSS’s scheme of avoiding the burdens of bankruptcy while reaping its benefits.
Juanita Jean (her son is the main litigator in the Texas cases), my son (he is a partner is biglaw firm and I had fun listening to this proceeding. Jones has found some low life attorneys to represent him and these idiots actually were offended that the plaintiffs/victims of his torts were not happy with Jones' shitty offer.
Link to tweet
https://abovethelaw.com/2022/04/alex-joness-bankruptcy-lawyer-indignant-that-sandy-hook-plaintiffs-arent-grateful-he-spared-them-their-day-in-court/
“We’re turning to the bankruptcy courts to compel the plaintiffs to estimate the value of their claims in open court by discernible evidentiary standards,” Alex Jones’s lawyer Norman Pattis told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday. “The plaintiffs have turned this litigation into a macabre morality play and have refused to negotiate in good faith. We hope they will show respect to the federal courts.”
Admitting that your client is placing three worthless companies into a sham bankruptcy for the express purpose of stopping a jury from assessing damages is a weird flex. But why should anything about this freak show be normal, right?....
But then the attorneys for the Texas and Connecticut plaintiffs got up to argue that the bankruptcy shouldn’t be allowed to go forward at all, since it was clearly a ploy to escape liquidated damages in Connecticut, where a jury trial was due to take place later this year, and Texas, where trial was set for this coming Monday. And furthermore, three companies with no assets which appear to conduct no business at all are not appropriate vehicles for subchapter V bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 101(51C), they insisted.
At which point Kyung Shik Lee, attorney for the supposedly bankrupt Jones entities, got up and ranted indignantly at the Sandy Hook plaintiffs that this was the first offer of money that they’d seen in ten years, and he’d heard nothing but complaints about his generous offer to pin their arms behind their backs and deny them their day in court.
The plaintiffs only filed their cases in 2018. Lest we forget, what happened ten years ago is that a gunman opened fire at an elementary school, killing 26 people. After which Mr. Lee’s client spent a year telling his deranged audience that the plaintiffs were simply pretending their children had been murdered, subjecting them to vicious harassment and death threats that forced at least one of them to go into hiding for his own safety.
Nevertheless, Lee insisted that “bankruptcy code and courts are the appropriate vehicle” for resolving “a sad and complex situation” which was actually on the eve of being decided by a jury. In fact, he continued, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs should thank Jones for his “good faith effort here to do something constructive with the bankruptcy process,” since otherwise the Texas plaintiffs might get all the money by dint of getting to the courthouse first. There are “limited funds and we’re trying to maximize it so it goes to the plaintiffs” he huffed, seeming hurt and offended that someone might suggest he had anything but the purest motives.
Admitting that your client is placing three worthless companies into a sham bankruptcy for the express purpose of stopping a jury from assessing damages is a weird flex. But why should anything about this freak show be normal, right?....
But then the attorneys for the Texas and Connecticut plaintiffs got up to argue that the bankruptcy shouldn’t be allowed to go forward at all, since it was clearly a ploy to escape liquidated damages in Connecticut, where a jury trial was due to take place later this year, and Texas, where trial was set for this coming Monday. And furthermore, three companies with no assets which appear to conduct no business at all are not appropriate vehicles for subchapter V bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 101(51C), they insisted.
At which point Kyung Shik Lee, attorney for the supposedly bankrupt Jones entities, got up and ranted indignantly at the Sandy Hook plaintiffs that this was the first offer of money that they’d seen in ten years, and he’d heard nothing but complaints about his generous offer to pin their arms behind their backs and deny them their day in court.
The plaintiffs only filed their cases in 2018. Lest we forget, what happened ten years ago is that a gunman opened fire at an elementary school, killing 26 people. After which Mr. Lee’s client spent a year telling his deranged audience that the plaintiffs were simply pretending their children had been murdered, subjecting them to vicious harassment and death threats that forced at least one of them to go into hiding for his own safety.
Nevertheless, Lee insisted that “bankruptcy code and courts are the appropriate vehicle” for resolving “a sad and complex situation” which was actually on the eve of being decided by a jury. In fact, he continued, the Sandy Hook plaintiffs should thank Jones for his “good faith effort here to do something constructive with the bankruptcy process,” since otherwise the Texas plaintiffs might get all the money by dint of getting to the courthouse first. There are “limited funds and we’re trying to maximize it so it goes to the plaintiffs” he huffed, seeming hurt and offended that someone might suggest he had anything but the purest motives.
According to my son, Lee mainly does bankruptcy committee work where you represent creditors or other parties in various committees in a bankruptcy. It seems that Committee attorneys tend to like to bluster and raise a fuss to try to get more money for their clients. Committee attorneys are not responsible for structuring the case and play a role in negotiating the plan used to get the debtors out of bankruptcy.
This was an interesting hearing. Jones' attorneys are assholes. My son explained the bankruptcy process to Juanita Jean and she decided that she did not need to call her son to get his explanation. My son does restructure work at a large fir and has been in a good number of bankruptcy hearings.
