Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Hrazanek VWP Inc. Bankruptcy 2013 Trustee Motion for Dismissal

Hrazanek VWP Inc. Bankruptcy 2013 Trustee Motion for Dismissal

Ratings: (0)|Views: 82 |Likes:
Published by Watershed Post
In 2013, William Hrazanek applied for bankruptcy for his company, VWP, Inc. The US trustee assigned to the case found that the bankruptcy application was filed in "bad faith," and advised that the case be dismissed.
In 2013, William Hrazanek applied for bankruptcy for his company, VWP, Inc. The US trustee assigned to the case found that the bankruptcy application was filed in "bad faith," and advised that the case be dismissed.

More info:

Published by: Watershed Post on Jul 11, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 1
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT Hearing Date: April 25, 2013NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Hearing Time: 10:30 a.m.---------------------------------------------------------- Hearing Location: Utica, NYIN RE:
VWP,
 
I
 NC
. Case No. 13-60282Chapter 11
Debtor.-----------------------------------------------------------UNITED STATES TRUSTEE
=
S MOTION PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C.
'
1112(b)FOR DISMISSAL OF THIS CASE OR CONVERSION TO CHAPTER 7
 TO THE HONORABLE DIANE DAVIS, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE:The United States Trustee for Region 2 (the
A
United States Trustee
@
), in furtherance of her duties and responsibilities set forth in 28 U.S.C.
'
586(a)(3),(5), hereby submits thisapplication for an order converting this Chapter 11 case to a Chapter 7 case or, in the alternative,dismissing this case, pursuant to 11 U.S.C.
'
1112(b)(4)(A), (C) and (E). In support of the relief requested, the United States Trustee represents and alleges as follows:1.
 
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 586(a)(3), the United States Trustee is charged with theduty of supervising the administration of cases filed under Chapter 11.2.
 
Section 586(a)(8) of title 28 states that “in any case in which the United StatesTrustee finds material grounds for relief under section 1112 of title 11, the United States Trusteeshall apply promptly after making that finding to the court for relief.”3.
 
According to 11 U.S.C. § 307, the United States Trustee has standing to be heard on any issue, in any bankruptcy case or proceeding.4.
 
This Court has jurisdiction over this matter, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A).
Case 13-60282-6-dd Doc 17 Filed 04/03/13 Entered 04/03/13 10:21:12 Desc MainDocument Page 1 of 10
 
 2
BACKGROUND
5.
 
VWP, Inc. (hereinafter “Debtor”) commenced this case by filing a voluntary petition under Chapter 11 on February 26, 2013.6.
 
The Debtor is a real estate holding company that holds title to two (2) commercial properties located in the Village of Fleischmanns, County of Delaware in the State of New York.One property is located at 102 Depot Street, Fleischmanns, NY (“Depot Street”) and the other one is located at 717 Wagner Avenue, Fleischmanns, NY (“Wagner Ave”), collectively knownas the “Properties”.7.
 
The Debtor has only one tenant, VW Parts, Inc. (“VW Parts”). VW Parts leases both commercial properties pursuant to a month to month tenancy. There is no written leaseagreement.8.
 
Upon information and belief, the Debtor is 100 % owned by William Hrazanek (“Mr. Hrazanek”). VW Parts is jointly owned by Mr. Hrazanek and his spouse, LarissaHrazanek. The Debtor has five (5) other affiliates through common ownership. Each is a realestate holding company and has, according to statements made at the Initial Debtor Interview(“IDI”), no business interaction with VW Parts or the Debtor.9.
 
 None of the other affiliates referenced in paragraph 8 have filed a case under anychapter of Title 11 of the United States Code.10.
 
This case was commenced to forestall a foreclosure action that was commenced  by Kenneth Pasternak (“Pasternak”), who is the mortgagee on both parcels of real propertyowned by the Debtor. On March 22, 2013, Pasternak filed a Motion for Relief from theAutomatic Stay. Thereafter, on March 25, 2013, Pasternak supplemented his application for stayrelief with a Motion for Adequate Protection. As his basis for relief, Pasternak asserts that his
Case 13-60282-6-dd Doc 17 Filed 04/03/13 Entered 04/03/13 10:21:12 Desc MainDocument Page 2 of 10
 
 3security interest is not adequately protected, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1).11.
 
Upon information and belief, neither the Debtor nor the sole tenant, VW Parts,derive any current income. VW Parts has not operated since July of 2011 nor has it paid any rentsince that time. Upon information and belief, the Debtor and its tenant were effectively put outof business due to damage caused by Hurricane Irene in 2011.12.
 
At the Initial Debtor Interview and 341 Meeting of Creditors, the Debtor wasinstructed on the requirements for being a Debtor-in-Possession and was provided with a list of informational and filing deficiencies. Specifically, the Debtor was advised of its duty to openDebtor-in-Possession bank accounts and provide proof of same, file a statement pursuant to L.R.2015-2, file a statement pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1116(1)(B) , and obtain insurance on the real property. At the 341 Meeting of Creditors, the Debtor did provide proof of insurance. However,the remaining requirements have not been satisfied.
ARGUMENTPOINT ITHE CASE MUST BE DISMISSED AS IT IS A BAD FAITH FILING
 13.
 
Section 1112(b) of title 11 states in relevant part that: “ …the court shall convert acase under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, if the movant establishes cause.”14.
 
Although Section 1112(b)(4) provides a listing of events that are defined as“cause” the list is illustrative but not exhaustive. “The Court will be able to consider other factorsas they arise, and to use its equitable powers to reach an appropriate result in individual cases.”
See In re C-Tc 9
th
Avenue Partnership, 113 F3d 1304,1311 (2d. Cir., 1997) citing House Report  No. 95-595 95
th
Cong., 1
st 
Sess. at 405-6 
Case 13-60282-6-dd Doc 17 Filed 04/03/13 Entered 04/03/13 10:21:12 Desc MainDocument Page 3 of 10

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->