Matt Zirzow Settlement Offer Posted Online
Source
https://arstechnica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/SettlementOffer.randazza.pdf
Wednesday 20 December 2017
Monday 11 December 2017
Matt Zirzow, Zacharia Larson; Marc Randazza Bankruptcy motion seeking to discover "ASSETS and unearthing FRAUDS".
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson of Larson & Zirzow, Las Vegas Bankruptcy attorneys for Debtor Marc J. Randazza have participated in Extreme Discrimination against a Pro Se Litigant, and Extreme Retaliation against a Former Marc Randazza, Randazza Legal Group client, me, Crystal Cox.
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson have NOT sought any sort of Malicious behavior ruling against Liberty Media Holdings or their attorney James D. Greene Greene Infuso, LLP, Nor has Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson sought a ruling of malicious behavior against Wendy Medura Krincek of LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. for Claiming that FRAUD may exist and hidden assets may exist, yet Zirzow & Larson did so to me, Crystal Cox, completely spiteful, malicious and with deliberate intentional fraud and abuse of the courts.
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson assisted Marc Randazza to use the bankruptcy courts to dissolve debt in favor of Creditors Randazza Legal Group, Ronald D. Green, and F. Chris Austin and Weide & Miller by aggressively placing a judgement against me to pay aprox. $500,000 in legal fees, for the Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza for 5 years of legal service suing me, Crystal Cox.
(See Doc. 44 and 45 Adv.16-01111)
Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza had no actual grounds to sue me, Crystal Cox and iViewit Inventor Eliot Bernstein. (See 2:12-cv-02040-JAD-PAL Doc. 200)
http://ia800304.us.archive.org/9/items/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330.200.0.pdf
Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza was awarded an Unconstitutional TRO to STEAL massive online content, search engine placement, domain names and intellectual property. All because I spoke critical of my former attorney Marc J. Randazza and his law firm Randazza Legal Group, poked fun, made parody and reviewed my personal experience. Full Docket of that case
I WAS DEEMED MALICIOUS AND MARC RANDAZZA GOT PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND 5 YEARS OF LEGAL FEES AWARDED TO HIM AND JENNIFER RANDAZZA FOR SUING ME IN 2012, A CASE OF WHICH IS STILL PENDING. Other Creditors made similar claims and they don't have to pay the Randazza's legal fees nor punitive for hurting Marc's feelings, ONLY ME.
Crystal Cox Objection to Fees.
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.29.0.pdf
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson are not Ethical, Fair, Upstanding Attorneys, in fact they are helping an attorney who supports pedophiles and revenge porn and is part of the human trafficking community. Zirzow and Larson have joined the ranks of attorneys who abuse woman who stand up to the Evils of the Porn Industry, who stand up to Porn attorney Marc Randazza.
Wendy Medura Krincek, Esq. of LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Attorney for Excelsior Media Corp. AND James D. Greene Greene Infuso, LLP attorney for Liberty Media Holdings filed the Following Motion, raising questions about Debtor Marc Randazza's ownership interests in certain entities, a marital pre-nuptial agreement with Jennifer Brochey Randazza and certain financial dealings.
The Motion regarding Examination of Marc Randazza also raises questions about certain pre-petition activities of Debtor Marc J. Randazza and assets listed or, perhaps not listed, on his schedules.
Crystal Cox, Creditor 13, Motion Objecting to Discharge of Marc Randazza Debt
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.29.0.pdf
I have VALID claims against my former attorney Marc Randazza, check out my story
https://crystalcoxclaimsagainstmarcrandazza.blogspot.com/
Keep an Eye on Marc Randazza's Bankruptcy
https://marcrandazzabankruptcy.blogspot.com/
Marc Randazza held himself out as my attorney, he bullied me to STOP me from appealing for his own gain, he ran over my rights and when I FIRED Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group, he sued me, threatened me, attacked me, launched a 5 year and counting malicious cyber attack and still seems to by lying about all to Federal Courts. Take a Look
https://marcrandazzabankruptcy.blogspot.com/2017/11/marc-randazza-held-himself-out-as-my.html
Have a Tip?
Please eMail any and ALL tips regarding Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson, Jennifer Randazza Brochey, Marc Randazza, Ronald Green, Randazza Legal Group, F. Chris Austin and Wiede & Miller. I am Looking for ANY and ALL Tips. ReverendCrystalCox@Gmail.com
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson have NOT sought any sort of Malicious behavior ruling against Liberty Media Holdings or their attorney James D. Greene Greene Infuso, LLP, Nor has Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson sought a ruling of malicious behavior against Wendy Medura Krincek of LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. for Claiming that FRAUD may exist and hidden assets may exist, yet Zirzow & Larson did so to me, Crystal Cox, completely spiteful, malicious and with deliberate intentional fraud and abuse of the courts.
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson assisted Marc Randazza to use the bankruptcy courts to dissolve debt in favor of Creditors Randazza Legal Group, Ronald D. Green, and F. Chris Austin and Weide & Miller by aggressively placing a judgement against me to pay aprox. $500,000 in legal fees, for the Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza for 5 years of legal service suing me, Crystal Cox.
(See Doc. 44 and 45 Adv.16-01111)
Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza had no actual grounds to sue me, Crystal Cox and iViewit Inventor Eliot Bernstein. (See 2:12-cv-02040-JAD-PAL Doc. 200)
http://ia800304.us.archive.org/9/items/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330.200.0.pdf
Jennifer Brochey Randazza and Marc Randazza was awarded an Unconstitutional TRO to STEAL massive online content, search engine placement, domain names and intellectual property. All because I spoke critical of my former attorney Marc J. Randazza and his law firm Randazza Legal Group, poked fun, made parody and reviewed my personal experience. Full Docket of that caseI WAS DEEMED MALICIOUS AND MARC RANDAZZA GOT PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND 5 YEARS OF LEGAL FEES AWARDED TO HIM AND JENNIFER RANDAZZA FOR SUING ME IN 2012, A CASE OF WHICH IS STILL PENDING. Other Creditors made similar claims and they don't have to pay the Randazza's legal fees nor punitive for hurting Marc's feelings, ONLY ME.
Crystal Cox Objection to Fees.
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.29.0.pdf
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson are not Ethical, Fair, Upstanding Attorneys, in fact they are helping an attorney who supports pedophiles and revenge porn and is part of the human trafficking community. Zirzow and Larson have joined the ranks of attorneys who abuse woman who stand up to the Evils of the Porn Industry, who stand up to Porn attorney Marc Randazza.
Wendy Medura Krincek, Esq. of LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Attorney for Excelsior Media Corp. AND James D. Greene Greene Infuso, LLP attorney for Liberty Media Holdings filed the Following Motion, raising questions about Debtor Marc Randazza's ownership interests in certain entities, a marital pre-nuptial agreement with Jennifer Brochey Randazza and certain financial dealings.
The Motion regarding Examination of Marc Randazza also raises questions about certain pre-petition activities of Debtor Marc J. Randazza and assets listed or, perhaps not listed, on his schedules.
A motion filed for the “purpose of discovering assets and unearthing frauds.” AND aimed at “obtaining information that will ... potentially uncover additional claims that may exist for the benefit of the estate”. Yet Zirzow & Larson maliciously got a half a million dollar JUDGMENT against me, Pro Se Litigant Crystal Cox, Creditor 13, for making those same claims.
Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson have enabled Marc Randazza to commit what sure looks to be bankruptcy fraud to me, and certainly is unethical, malicious retaliation, cruel, dishonest and most certainly on the WRONG side of the Moral Compass. Using the power of the bankruptcy courts to punish women who stand up to the Evil Deeds of Porn Attorney and Pedophile Supporter Marc Randazza.
Click Below to Read the Motion Filed
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.187.0.pdfCrystal Cox, Creditor 13, Motion Objecting to Discharge of Marc Randazza Debt
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.29.0.pdf
I have VALID claims against my former attorney Marc Randazza, check out my story
https://crystalcoxclaimsagainstmarcrandazza.blogspot.com/
Keep an Eye on Marc Randazza's Bankruptcy
https://marcrandazzabankruptcy.blogspot.com/
Marc Randazza held himself out as my attorney, he bullied me to STOP me from appealing for his own gain, he ran over my rights and when I FIRED Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group, he sued me, threatened me, attacked me, launched a 5 year and counting malicious cyber attack and still seems to by lying about all to Federal Courts. Take a Look
https://marcrandazzabankruptcy.blogspot.com/2017/11/marc-randazza-held-himself-out-as-my.html
Have a Tip?
Please eMail any and ALL tips regarding Matt Zirzow and Zacharia Larson, Jennifer Randazza Brochey, Marc Randazza, Ronald Green, Randazza Legal Group, F. Chris Austin and Wiede & Miller. I am Looking for ANY and ALL Tips. ReverendCrystalCox@Gmail.com
Sunday 26 November 2017
Thursday 16 November 2017
Marc John Randazza Bankruptcy Case. Crystal Cox's OBJECTION to a DEFAULT against her Objection to Discharge of Debt Docket Entry 36.
Marc John Randazza Bankruptcy Case. Crystal Cox's OBJECTION to a DEFAULT against her Objection to Discharge... by Crystal Cox on Scribd
U.S. Bankruptcy Court
District of Nevada (Las Vegas)
Adversary Proceeding #: 16-01111-abl Docket as of 10/30/2017
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CbWvv1A1N8CaaOO3ioafaWnOSG0t3D6n/view?usp=sharing
Sunday 12 November 2017
Marc Randazza Bankruptcy, Liberty Media / Excelsior Settlement Offer June 2015
So Florida will most likely disbar? Here we are nearly 2.5 years later. Anyway just saw this online so I am sharing it with my readers researching Marc Randazza's Bankruptcy.
https://arstechnica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/SettlementOffer.randazza.pdf
https://arstechnica.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/SettlementOffer.randazza.pdf
Wednesday 1 November 2017
Marc Randazza has a Pattern and History of doing the same thing to people. Yet continues to sign sworn declarations of False Claims. Below is a Message from London's Tony Coe
"Crystal, I'm also a client of Randazza's. He violated rules when representing me in a deposition, admitted as much, and undertook to pay all my consequential costs. It won't surprise you to hear that he did not honor his promise! I'm also listed as a creditor."
Sent to me from Tony COE London
See Filing Below for Creditors List
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkidkJSZWwtWnVaN2c/view
Sent to me from Tony COE London
See Filing Below for Creditors List
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkidkJSZWwtWnVaN2c/view
Marc Randazza held himself out as my attorney, he bullied me to STOP me from appealing for his own gain, he ran over my rights and when I FIRED Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group, he sued me, threatened me, attacked me, launched a 5 year and counting malicious cyber attack and still seems to by lying about all to Federal Courts. Take a Look
In Marc Randazza’s Recent Filing, Motion for Default, Case 16-01111-abl Doc 26 Entered 10/20/17, he claims that ONLY upon Volokh being interested in teaming up with him was he then “willing to accept the case”. Meaning the Crystal Cox Ninth Circuit Appeal. Yet Crystal Cox claims Randazza represented her before this and told others he was her attorney. Randazza states in earlies sworn documents a different version of his story, let’s take a look.
Page 38, Line 26-28 and Page 39 1-4, Case 16-01111-abl Doc 26, (Randazza Decl. ¶ 26) Says: “Only upon Mr. Volokh expressing an interest in teaming up on the case with him did Mr. Randazza decide that he was willing to accept the case. (Randazza Decl. ¶ 26).”
In this sworn statement (Randazza Decl. ¶ 26) Randazza claims he was only interested in representing me, Crystal Cox, with Volokh and only offered to represent me after this conversation. Even though, the only reason Volokh was talking to Randazza about me, Crystal Cox was Randazza told Volokh he represented Crystal Cox. And that he was brokering a deal with the Opposition in the Obsidian case, David Aman.
In this sworn statement (Randazza Decl. ¶ 26) Randazza claims he was only interested in representing me, Crystal Cox, with Volokh and only offered to represent me after this conversation. Even though, the only reason Volokh was talking to Randazza about me, Crystal Cox was Randazza told Volokh he represented Crystal Cox. And that he was brokering a deal with the Opposition in the Obsidian case, David Aman.
The statement is false, and it is making a false declaration to a Federal Court while knowing full well it is False as Randazza swore to different facts in Case 2:12-cv-02040-JAD-PAL Document 252 Filed 04/06/15, Exhibit 9, Marc Randazza’s sworn interrogatory answers.
So in Case 16-01111-abl Doc 26, Page 38, Line 26-28 and Page 39 1-4, we see RANDAZZA swearing that he ONLY agreed to Represent Cox after Volokh expressed interest to team up with him. We see below in a previous Sworn statement of Randazza that he was involved in representation BEFORE speaking with Volokh, talking strategy with Volokh, and only spoke with Volokh after he had already put in time and material into representation.
Interrogatory 21 Exhibit 9:
“Did you have phone conversations with Eugene Volokh and state that you represented Cox and discuss with him your strategy, or a deal you were trying to make with the opposition, Plaintiff’s attorney David Aman?”
“Did you have phone conversations with Eugene Volokh and state that you represented Cox and discuss with him your strategy, or a deal you were trying to make with the opposition, Plaintiff’s attorney David Aman?”
Randazza’s Sworn RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21:
"... Counterdefendant responds as follows:
Counterdefendant spoke with Eugene Volokh in December 2011.
Counterdefendant informed Volokh that if he was going to represent Cox, that Randazza would gladly bow out, and defer to Volokh to handle the case.
Volokh, however, said that he would prefer that Randazza co-counsel the case with him due to Volokh’s stated lack of litigation experience. Counterdefendant and Volokh discussed possible strategies that he and Volokh thought might be good ideas during that call.
Counterdefendant and Volokh both discussed the fact that Cox’s interests would be better served through settlement."
"... Counterdefendant responds as follows:
Counterdefendant spoke with Eugene Volokh in December 2011.
Counterdefendant informed Volokh that if he was going to represent Cox, that Randazza would gladly bow out, and defer to Volokh to handle the case.
Volokh, however, said that he would prefer that Randazza co-counsel the case with him due to Volokh’s stated lack of litigation experience. Counterdefendant and Volokh discussed possible strategies that he and Volokh thought might be good ideas during that call.
Counterdefendant and Volokh both discussed the fact that Cox’s interests would be better served through settlement."
What gave Marc Randazza a legal right to negotiate who gets to be my attorney with him, if he was not indeed my attorney, or acting as if he was my attorney?
Randazza and Volokh discussed strategy? About Me? They discussed that a settlement was in my, Crystal Cox’s, best interest?
A couple of guys deciding what was in my best interest and Randazza proceeding with steps to negotiate what was in my best interest when Randazza clearly and plainly knew that I want to appeal. I did NOT want to settle nor did I want some aggressive, asshole man to decide it would be better if I settled and push me to do what I did want to do, negotiate behind my back, and trick and deceive me by letting the deadline run out while he held himself out as my attorney so no one else would represent me, thereby blocking me from appealing. He did not know I had talked to Volokh when he tried to pull off this malicious scheme.
In Conclusion,
Page 38, Number 1-13 of Interrogatory 21 Exhibit 9, Case 2:12-cv-02040-JAD-PAL Document 252 Filed 04/06/15 is Marc J. Randazza’s SWORN statement that the Interrogatory Answers are true to the best of his knowledge, yet we see on Page 38, Line 26-28 and Page 39 1-4, Case 16-01111-abl Doc 26, (Randazza Decl. ¶ 26) that Marc Randazza swears to the a VERY different Answer.
“I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: October 20, 2017.
/s/ Marc J. Randazza
MARC J. RANDAZZA, ESQ.”
Dated: October 20, 2017.
/s/ Marc J. Randazza
MARC J. RANDAZZA, ESQ.”
So How Can Both be True under penalty of perjury?
Tuesday 31 October 2017
Be Reminded Creditors to Check out Randazza vs. Cox as a BIG part of that case is about Marc Randazza (Debtor) claiming that I, Crystal Cox used a Proxy to hide Assets such as Domain Names, yet I don't believe that Randazza has listed Domain Names or Web Properties as Assets on His Bankruptcy. I will be filing more in the Bankruptcy Courts regarding this, Stay Tuned, for now be aware there are More Assets.
Much more Coming Soon on this Topic in Great Detail
Thursday 26 October 2017
Complaint for Nondischargeability of Debts Filed by LIBERTY MEDIA HOLDINGS, LLC, EXCELSIOR MEDIA CORP. vs. MARC JOHN RANDAZZA
"83 Filed: 11/30/2015,
Entered: 11/30/2015
Complaint Adversary case 15-01193.
Complaint for Nondischargeability of Debts Filed by LIBERTY MEDIA HOLDINGS, LLC, EXCELSIOR MEDIA CORP. vs. MARC JOHN RANDAZZA
(Attachments: # 1 Discovery Plan # 2 Adversary Proceeding Procedures # 3 Exhibit 1- IAA) (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)(GREENWALT, VAUGHN) (Entered: 11/30/2015).
Source and More
https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2nc6vzk35/nevada-bankruptcy-court/marc-john-randazza/
COMPLAINT
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.83.0.pdf
Entered: 11/30/2015
Complaint Adversary case 15-01193.
Complaint for Nondischargeability of Debts Filed by LIBERTY MEDIA HOLDINGS, LLC, EXCELSIOR MEDIA CORP. vs. MARC JOHN RANDAZZA
(Attachments: # 1 Discovery Plan # 2 Adversary Proceeding Procedures # 3 Exhibit 1- IAA) (62 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, actual fraud)(67 (Dischargeability - 523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny)(GREENWALT, VAUGHN) (Entered: 11/30/2015).
Source and More
https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2nc6vzk35/nevada-bankruptcy-court/marc-john-randazza/
COMPLAINT
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.83.0.pdf
Wednesday 25 October 2017
Marc Randazza Bankruptcy Challenges by Liberty Media
Marc Randazza Bankruptcy and Liberty Media
"In the meantime, Randazza's old employer, Liberty Media, is challenging his Nevada court filing seeking Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. In that filing, Randazza claimed assets of up to $10 million, and liabilities of up to $50 million. Randazza included in his liabilities a potential $10 million judgement against him in a lawsuit with a blogger, Crystal Cox of Washington; $1 million to Liberty; as well as another $1 million judgement against him in a lawsuit he's embroiled in with Roca Labs of Largo, Florida."
Source and More
http://1701news.com/node/1183/so-who-klingon-lawyer-marc-randazza.html
IAA could be confirmed by the state court, Debtor, by and through its counsel L&Z, initiated
settlement negotiations with E/L. During these negotiations, Debtor consistently used the threat of
a bankruptcy petition in an attempt to negotiate a sum of payment significantly reduced from that
awarded to E/L in the IAA. Not only did Debtor use the threat of bankruptcy as a cudgel, but he andhis allegedly estranged wife have initiated sealed divorce proceedings, and dissipated assets."
"Debtor attempted delay for two reasons: (1) in a misguided effort to stay the award of attorneys fees by the Arbitrator, as well as the confirmation of the IAA by the state court; and (2) to push the date of petition out more than 90 days, so that Debtor’s fraudulent, improper, and preferential transfers could not be clawed back, including payments to his attorneys L&Z.
According to Debtor’s schedules filed on September 11, 2015, Debtor has deposited with
L&Z sums totaling $94,000. [ECF 15] On September 22, 2015, L&Z filed the instant Application
to Employ and Retain Larson & Zirzow, LLC as Attorneys for the Debtor Nunc Pro Tunc to the
Petition Date."
"According to the retainer agreements and statements made therein, L&Z entered into
representation of Debtor as of June 11, 2015 for “pre-bankruptcy settlement negotiations and to
attend a settlement conference. The Debtor paid L&Z a flat fee of $10,000.00 for this engagement.”
"L&Z also purports to have been retained, via two separate retainer agreements, for representation in both a bankruptcy action, and a potential adversary proceeding."
"the second was for potential nondischargeability litigation. "
"L&Z’s Application is deficient as it relates to exactly what the scope of services are that it
has billed for as of yet. In fact, L&Z only informs as to the fact that it has received a total sum of
$94,000 for legal services in connection with Debtor’s Chapter 11 case. “Of this sum, L&Z billed
and was paid the sum of $26,908.82 prior to the Petition Date, and L&Z currently holds in trust the
remainder sum of $67,091.18 (the “Remaining Retainer”) a portion of which has been allocated
pursuant to the Representation Agreements for potential adversary proceedings.” [ECF 18 at ¶16 (emphasis added)] This Application utterly fails to identify and delineate what services were
provided totaling $26,908.82."
"In any event, all transfers were made within 90 days of the filing of Debtor’s Petition. As
such, the “pre-bankruptcy” retainer fees charged and collected by L&Z constitute an avoidable
preferential transfer, and the funds must be clawed back to the estate. As a result, L&Z will lose
their status as “disinterested parties” and are therefore not qualified to serve as attorneys for the
Debtor.
II. L&Z’S APPLICATION IS INSUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE TEST FOR
APPROVAL OF HIRING OF PROFESSIONALS.
L&Z’s employment as attorneys for the debtor in possession in a Chapter 11 case is
governed by § 327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires court approval for the attorney's
employment. The bankruptcy court is charged with “ensur[ing] that attorneys who represent the
debtor do so in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate.” In re Park–Helena Corp., 63 F.3d 877,
880 (9th Cir.1995). Under § 327, an attorney for a debtor cannot “hold or represent an interest
adverse to the estate”; he or she must be a “disinterested person.” 11 U.S.C. § 327(a).
Any creditor of the estate, or anyone with “an interest materially adverse to the interest of the estate ... by reason of any direct or indirect relationship to, connection with, or interest in, the debtor,” is not a disinterested person. 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(14)(A), (C). A “creditor” includes any “entity that has a
claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the
debtor.” § 101(10)(A). A “claim” includes any “right to payment.” § 101(5)(A).
To enable the Bankruptcy Court to evaluate an attorney's potential employment, Rule
2014(a) requires that an application for employment of an attorney under § 327 “shall be
accompanied by a verified statement of the person to be employed setting forth the person's
connections with the debtor, creditors, any other party in interest, their respective attorneys and
accountants, the United States trustee, or any person employed in the office of the United States
trustee.” Fed. R. Bankr.P. 2014(a). This disclosure requirement is applied “strictly.” Park–Helena,
63 F.3d at 881.
An attorney approved for employment under § 327 must apply for interim or final
compensation, which is subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court. 11 U.S.C. §§ 328–31; see also
In re Chapel Gate Apartments, Ltd., 64 B.R. 569, 575 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.1986) (noting that “fees in
bankruptcy cases ... are subject to review, modification, and outright cancellation by the Court”).
Rule 2016(a) requires an attorney seeking compensation and/or reimbursement of expenses to file
an application “setting forth a detailed statement of (1) the services rendered, time expended and
expenses incurred, and (2) the amounts requested.”
The fee application must also include, inter alia, “a statement as to what payments have theretofore been made or promised to the applicant for services rendered or to be rendered in any capacity whatsoever in connection with the case, [and] the source of the compensation so paid or promised.” Id. After notice and a hearing, the court may award “reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered,” as well as “reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses.” §330(a)(1)."
Source and Full Filing
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.38.0.pdf
Liberty Media Move for Order to Modify Stay
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.0.pdf
Doc. 60-2 to above Motion
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.2.pdf
Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award Exhibit - 60-6
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.6.pdf
Liberty Media Reply
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.80.0.pdf
COMPLAINT by Liberty Media and Others to Determine Non-Dischargeable Debt
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.83.0.pdf
Doc. 120 filed by Liberty Media, First Amended Complaint, Demand for Jury Trial
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.120.0.pdf
Marc Randazza Bankruptcy Case Docket
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.docket.html
Doc. 148 Settlement
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.148.0.pdf
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.157.0.pdf
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING EXAMINATION
PURSUANT TO FED.R.BANKR.P.2004 OF MARC J. RANDAZZA
"Creditors Excelsior Media Corp. (“Excelsior”) and Liberty Media Holdings, LLC
(“Liberty” and together with Excelsior, “Creditors”), by and through their counsel, James D.
Greene, Esq. of Greene Infuso, LLP pursuant to section 105 of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule
2004 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and Rule 2004 of the Local Rules of
Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure, hereby apply to the Court for entry of order directing Debtor
Marc J. Randazza (“Debtor”) to appear for and submit to examination under oath before certified court reporter at the office of Greene Infuso, LLP, 3030 South Jones Blvd. Suite 101, Las Vegas, Nevada 89146 on a date and time to be determined, providing that notice of said examination is to be provided no less than 10 judicial days before such examination date. In support of this
application (“Application”), Creditors state as follows:
Above Order Granted
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.188.0.pdf
Doc. 191 Liberty Media SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION FOR ORDER CONFIRMING INTERIMARBITRATION AWARD
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.191.0.pdf
CAN YOU SAY PATTERN AND HISTORY ???
"In the meantime, Randazza's old employer, Liberty Media, is challenging his Nevada court filing seeking Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. In that filing, Randazza claimed assets of up to $10 million, and liabilities of up to $50 million. Randazza included in his liabilities a potential $10 million judgement against him in a lawsuit with a blogger, Crystal Cox of Washington; $1 million to Liberty; as well as another $1 million judgement against him in a lawsuit he's embroiled in with Roca Labs of Largo, Florida."
Source and More
http://1701news.com/node/1183/so-who-klingon-lawyer-marc-randazza.html
Liberty Media Opposition Motion (Doc. 38)
"In an effort to avoid payment of the entire monetary component of the IAA, and before theIAA could be confirmed by the state court, Debtor, by and through its counsel L&Z, initiated
settlement negotiations with E/L. During these negotiations, Debtor consistently used the threat of
a bankruptcy petition in an attempt to negotiate a sum of payment significantly reduced from that
awarded to E/L in the IAA. Not only did Debtor use the threat of bankruptcy as a cudgel, but he andhis allegedly estranged wife have initiated sealed divorce proceedings, and dissipated assets."
"Debtor attempted delay for two reasons: (1) in a misguided effort to stay the award of attorneys fees by the Arbitrator, as well as the confirmation of the IAA by the state court; and (2) to push the date of petition out more than 90 days, so that Debtor’s fraudulent, improper, and preferential transfers could not be clawed back, including payments to his attorneys L&Z.
According to Debtor’s schedules filed on September 11, 2015, Debtor has deposited with
L&Z sums totaling $94,000. [ECF 15] On September 22, 2015, L&Z filed the instant Application
to Employ and Retain Larson & Zirzow, LLC as Attorneys for the Debtor Nunc Pro Tunc to the
Petition Date."
"According to the retainer agreements and statements made therein, L&Z entered into
representation of Debtor as of June 11, 2015 for “pre-bankruptcy settlement negotiations and to
attend a settlement conference. The Debtor paid L&Z a flat fee of $10,000.00 for this engagement.”
"L&Z also purports to have been retained, via two separate retainer agreements, for representation in both a bankruptcy action, and a potential adversary proceeding."
"the second was for potential nondischargeability litigation. "
"L&Z’s Application is deficient as it relates to exactly what the scope of services are that it
has billed for as of yet. In fact, L&Z only informs as to the fact that it has received a total sum of
$94,000 for legal services in connection with Debtor’s Chapter 11 case. “Of this sum, L&Z billed
and was paid the sum of $26,908.82 prior to the Petition Date, and L&Z currently holds in trust the
remainder sum of $67,091.18 (the “Remaining Retainer”) a portion of which has been allocated
pursuant to the Representation Agreements for potential adversary proceedings.” [ECF 18 at ¶16 (emphasis added)] This Application utterly fails to identify and delineate what services were
provided totaling $26,908.82."
"In any event, all transfers were made within 90 days of the filing of Debtor’s Petition. As
such, the “pre-bankruptcy” retainer fees charged and collected by L&Z constitute an avoidable
preferential transfer, and the funds must be clawed back to the estate. As a result, L&Z will lose
their status as “disinterested parties” and are therefore not qualified to serve as attorneys for the
Debtor.
II. L&Z’S APPLICATION IS INSUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE TEST FOR
APPROVAL OF HIRING OF PROFESSIONALS.
L&Z’s employment as attorneys for the debtor in possession in a Chapter 11 case is
governed by § 327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires court approval for the attorney's
employment. The bankruptcy court is charged with “ensur[ing] that attorneys who represent the
debtor do so in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate.” In re Park–Helena Corp., 63 F.3d 877,
880 (9th Cir.1995). Under § 327, an attorney for a debtor cannot “hold or represent an interest
adverse to the estate”; he or she must be a “disinterested person.” 11 U.S.C. § 327(a).
Any creditor of the estate, or anyone with “an interest materially adverse to the interest of the estate ... by reason of any direct or indirect relationship to, connection with, or interest in, the debtor,” is not a disinterested person. 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(14)(A), (C). A “creditor” includes any “entity that has a
claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the
debtor.” § 101(10)(A). A “claim” includes any “right to payment.” § 101(5)(A).
To enable the Bankruptcy Court to evaluate an attorney's potential employment, Rule
2014(a) requires that an application for employment of an attorney under § 327 “shall be
accompanied by a verified statement of the person to be employed setting forth the person's
connections with the debtor, creditors, any other party in interest, their respective attorneys and
accountants, the United States trustee, or any person employed in the office of the United States
trustee.” Fed. R. Bankr.P. 2014(a). This disclosure requirement is applied “strictly.” Park–Helena,
63 F.3d at 881.
An attorney approved for employment under § 327 must apply for interim or final
compensation, which is subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court. 11 U.S.C. §§ 328–31; see also
In re Chapel Gate Apartments, Ltd., 64 B.R. 569, 575 (Bankr.N.D.Tex.1986) (noting that “fees in
bankruptcy cases ... are subject to review, modification, and outright cancellation by the Court”).
Rule 2016(a) requires an attorney seeking compensation and/or reimbursement of expenses to file
an application “setting forth a detailed statement of (1) the services rendered, time expended and
expenses incurred, and (2) the amounts requested.”
The fee application must also include, inter alia, “a statement as to what payments have theretofore been made or promised to the applicant for services rendered or to be rendered in any capacity whatsoever in connection with the case, [and] the source of the compensation so paid or promised.” Id. After notice and a hearing, the court may award “reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered,” as well as “reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses.” §330(a)(1)."
Source and Full Filing
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.38.0.pdf
Liberty Media Move for Order to Modify Stay
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.0.pdf
Doc. 60-2 to above Motion
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.2.pdf
Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award Exhibit - 60-6
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.60.6.pdf
Liberty Media Reply
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.80.0.pdf
COMPLAINT by Liberty Media and Others to Determine Non-Dischargeable Debt
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.83.0.pdf
Doc. 120 filed by Liberty Media, First Amended Complaint, Demand for Jury Trial
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.120.0.pdf
Marc Randazza Bankruptcy Case Docket
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.docket.html
Doc. 148 Settlement
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.148.0.pdf
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.157.0.pdf
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING EXAMINATION
PURSUANT TO FED.R.BANKR.P.2004 OF MARC J. RANDAZZA
Doc. 187
(“Liberty” and together with Excelsior, “Creditors”), by and through their counsel, James D.
Greene, Esq. of Greene Infuso, LLP pursuant to section 105 of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule
2004 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and Rule 2004 of the Local Rules of
Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure, hereby apply to the Court for entry of order directing Debtor
Marc J. Randazza (“Debtor”) to appear for and submit to examination under oath before certified court reporter at the office of Greene Infuso, LLP, 3030 South Jones Blvd. Suite 101, Las Vegas, Nevada 89146 on a date and time to be determined, providing that notice of said examination is to be provided no less than 10 judicial days before such examination date. In support of this
application (“Application”), Creditors state as follows:
LEGAL ARGUMENT
An examination pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2004 can be ordered [o]n motion of any
party in interest.” In re Stasz, 387 B.R. 271, 273 n.3 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2008); see also In re Lifeco
Inv. Grp., Inc., 173 B.R. 478, 480 (Bankr. D. Del 1994), quoting Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2004(a).
Bankruptcy Rule 2004 further provides that the Court may order the examination and the
production of documentary evidence concerning any matter that relates “to the liabilities and
financial condition of the debtor, or to any matter which may affect the administration of the
debtor’s estate, or… any other matter relevant to the case or tot the formulation of a plan.” Fed.
R. Bankr. P. 2004(b); see also In re Dinubilo, 177 B.R. 932, 936 n.6 (E.D. Cal. 1993) (noting that
“[u]nder Rule 2004, a court may order the examination of any person on motion of any party in
interest.”).
Generally, examinations under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 are for the “purpose of
discovering assets and unearthing frauds.” In re Rafsky, 300 B.R. 152, 153 n.2 (Bankr. D. Conn.
2003) (citation omitted); In re N. Plaza LLC, 395 B.R. 113, 122 n.9 (S.D. Cal. 2008).
The scope of a Bankruptcy Rule 2004 examination is “unfettered and broad,” as the plain
language of the rule indicates. See 9 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 2004.02[1] at 2004-6 (15th ed. Rev.
1997); In re Dinublilo, 177 B. R. at 939 quoting In re GHR Energy Corp., 33 B.R. 451, 453
(Bankr. D. Mass. 1983).
The broad latitude of Bankruptcy Rule 2004 examination furthers the purpose of the rule, which is “to allow the court to gain a clear picture of the condition and the whereabouts of the bankrupt’s estate. In re Int’l Fibercom, Inc., 283 B.R. 290, 292 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2002) (permitted Bankruptcy Rule 2004 examination aimed at “obtaining information that will … potentially uncover additional claims that may exist for the benefit of the estate”); see also In re W & S Investments, Inc., 985 F.2d 577 (9th Cir. 1993) (“Bankruptcy Rule 2004 is a broadly construed discovery device…”); In re French, 145 B. R 991, 992 (Bankr. D.S.D. 1992) (“Bankruptcy Rule 2004… does not offer the procedural safeguards available under Rule 26 of the Federal Rule Rules of Civil Procedure.”)."
"The information and documents which Creditors seek through this Application relate to
matters that are clearly with the permitted scope of Rule 2004, including: (i) property of the
Debtor’s bankruptcy estate; (ii) transactions and business dealings involving the Debtor and
family members and corporate entities; (iii) potential claims the Creditor may have against third
parties; and (iv) other matters affecting the administration of the Debtor’s estate."
Source and Full Document
Above Order Granted
http://ia800807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.188.0.pdf
Doc. 191 Liberty Media SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION FOR ORDER CONFIRMING INTERIMARBITRATION AWARD
http://ia600807.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854/gov.uscourts.nvb.348854.191.0.pdf
CAN YOU SAY PATTERN AND HISTORY ???
"Randazza took on other clients without Liberty's consent" ya I, Crystal Cox, was probably one of them.
"But it appears the Randazza who spoke to Law360 is much more like the real Randazza that others have experienced, compared to the one who is representing LCS. In fact, last November, Ars Technica reporter Joe Mullin published a 3,000-word exposé on the Las Vegas attorney headlined "Bribery, gay porn and copyright trolls: The rise and fall of lawyer Marc Randazza."
The story highlighted an arbitration action Randazza initiated against his former employer, Liberty Media, accusing them of a number of things, including shooting a porn film in his office. Randazza sought hundreds of thousands of dollars from Liberty, but actually lost the case. Not that the attorney walked away with nothing, but the arbiter instead found Randazza owed Liberty at least $600,000 — and according to Randazza's bankruptcy filing in Nevada, up to $1 million — for a variety of claims, according to Ars Technica, including:
• Randazza "secretly negotiated" a $75,000 bribe from a defendant in a legal action;
• Randazza did unauthorized outside work while working for Liberty;
• And Randazza kept a $55,000 payment in a legal action he's actually most famous for, that should've instead went to Liberty.
That $55,000 payment was part of what is known as the Righthaven cases, where a company founded by a Nevada lawyer formed partnership agreements with newspapers as a way to crack down and collect revenue from blogs and online news sites that repurposed those stories.
Randazza became a darling of free press advocates when he defended many of those sites, helping to bring down Righthaven, which courts ultimately ruled had no standing to file the copyright suits in the first place.
Randazza did that work while working for Liberty, with the company's blessing. But then Randazza took on other clients without Liberty's consent, according to arbitration reports.
He sometimes even took on clients who Liberty was in legal squabbles with. One of those clients was a Youtube-style porn site known as Xvideos, which Liberty was cracking down on to stop its content from being pirated there.
Liberty claimed Randazza accepted a $35,000 retainer fee from Xvideos to represent them as well as additional monthly payments, while telling Liberty they shouldn't sue the site.
Instead, Randazza hatched a plan to go after individual people who downloaded Liberty content illegally through torrent sites, according to reports. Under this program, Randazza would locate an individual content pirate, and offer an "amnesty" of paying $1,000 to stop and not be sued by Liberty. "Dozens" of people paid the amnesty fee, a Liberty executive told Ars Technica, to the point where Randazza allegedly wanted to expand the program ... and charge a higher amnesty fee.
The program backfired before that next phase could begin. Bloggers who had once sided with Randazza were suddenly against him, including some gay-themed blogs that said Randazza was extorting people who might be "outed" if they instead chose to fight the lawsuit.
When the popular blog Queerty lashed out at Liberty and its legal strategy, saying it could actually nudge closeted teenagers and others toward suicide, Randazza himself spoke up.
"Liberty Media produces straight content too," Randazza said. "So any thieving little shit who gets caught can very easily lie to his parents that he was looking at straight porn."
Except Queerty pointed out that's not true — a lawsuit would have to state specifically what the offender had downloaded, which its sexual orientation audience would be obvious.
"The gay porn studio threatening to sue illegal file sharers doesn't seem too concerned that its lawsuits against some 40,000 so-far-anonymous BitTorrent users might out closeted gay teens who live in violent homophobic households," Queerty"
Source and More
http://1701news.com/node/1183/so-who-klingon-lawyer-marc-randazza.html
The story highlighted an arbitration action Randazza initiated against his former employer, Liberty Media, accusing them of a number of things, including shooting a porn film in his office. Randazza sought hundreds of thousands of dollars from Liberty, but actually lost the case. Not that the attorney walked away with nothing, but the arbiter instead found Randazza owed Liberty at least $600,000 — and according to Randazza's bankruptcy filing in Nevada, up to $1 million — for a variety of claims, according to Ars Technica, including:
• Randazza "secretly negotiated" a $75,000 bribe from a defendant in a legal action;
• Randazza did unauthorized outside work while working for Liberty;
• And Randazza kept a $55,000 payment in a legal action he's actually most famous for, that should've instead went to Liberty.
That $55,000 payment was part of what is known as the Righthaven cases, where a company founded by a Nevada lawyer formed partnership agreements with newspapers as a way to crack down and collect revenue from blogs and online news sites that repurposed those stories.
Randazza became a darling of free press advocates when he defended many of those sites, helping to bring down Righthaven, which courts ultimately ruled had no standing to file the copyright suits in the first place.
Randazza did that work while working for Liberty, with the company's blessing. But then Randazza took on other clients without Liberty's consent, according to arbitration reports.
He sometimes even took on clients who Liberty was in legal squabbles with. One of those clients was a Youtube-style porn site known as Xvideos, which Liberty was cracking down on to stop its content from being pirated there.
Liberty claimed Randazza accepted a $35,000 retainer fee from Xvideos to represent them as well as additional monthly payments, while telling Liberty they shouldn't sue the site.
Instead, Randazza hatched a plan to go after individual people who downloaded Liberty content illegally through torrent sites, according to reports. Under this program, Randazza would locate an individual content pirate, and offer an "amnesty" of paying $1,000 to stop and not be sued by Liberty. "Dozens" of people paid the amnesty fee, a Liberty executive told Ars Technica, to the point where Randazza allegedly wanted to expand the program ... and charge a higher amnesty fee.
The program backfired before that next phase could begin. Bloggers who had once sided with Randazza were suddenly against him, including some gay-themed blogs that said Randazza was extorting people who might be "outed" if they instead chose to fight the lawsuit.
When the popular blog Queerty lashed out at Liberty and its legal strategy, saying it could actually nudge closeted teenagers and others toward suicide, Randazza himself spoke up.
"Liberty Media produces straight content too," Randazza said. "So any thieving little shit who gets caught can very easily lie to his parents that he was looking at straight porn."
Except Queerty pointed out that's not true — a lawsuit would have to state specifically what the offender had downloaded, which its sexual orientation audience would be obvious.
"The gay porn studio threatening to sue illegal file sharers doesn't seem too concerned that its lawsuits against some 40,000 so-far-anonymous BitTorrent users might out closeted gay teens who live in violent homophobic households," Queerty"
Source and More
http://1701news.com/node/1183/so-who-klingon-lawyer-marc-randazza.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)