I think we have many cases for Overturning the BK Chapter 11 and here is one.I know diferent one but by the Law is possible to have the Chpt 11 BK Protection overturned.Some examples and second one if more fitting to our case as it regardes to BK Fraud charges similar to our case against the BOD and the thieves in posession.
This one is similar to ours and could be used as Case for overturning the BK Order of the low court based on the BK Fraud proven charges.Easy in our case as that idiot WallRat have made so many procedurial mistakes that any normal court could push a investigation on her Legal Behavioure.Of course this in the best Case for us.But read below this case.
The Bankruptcy Code excludes from a bankrupt debtor’s discharge the debtor’s liability for any debt for money, property, services, or credit to the extent the debt was 'obtained by' actual fraud. By its plain terms, Section 523(a)(2)(A) applies only to a debt 'obtained by' actual fraud. ... Husky’s theory was that the fraudulent conveyances constituted 'actual fraud.' A majority of the Supreme Court today agreed with Husky, but as Justice [Clarence] Thomas pointed out in his dissent, the relevant debt ... was not 'obtained by' fraud as the statute requires. The debt ... was for goods Husky sold to Chrysalis, and there was never any allegation that Ritz induced Husky to deliver the goods by any fraudulent inducement. Thus, Justice Thomas reasoned, the relevant debt in this case does not fit the statutory criteria. ... Given the court’s clear statement that it was not deciding whether the particular debt in the Husky case was 'obtained by' fraud, it seems fair to conclude that all the court actually decided today was that a fraudulent transfer could be an example of actual fraud, not whether Ritz’ particular obligation was actually nondischargeable. On remand, the Fifth Circuit will have to decide that question. Under Justice’s Thomas’ reasoning, which is correct, it should not be."
Read the coments below.
The Supreme Court's decision protects against the Bankruptcy Code becoming an engine for fraud.(This is more conected to our case) In the years leading up to this case, lower courts disagreed about whether the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor to discharge debts for receiving fraudulently transferred property. If the Supreme Court had adopted Ritz's interpretation of the code, it would have created a high-profile blueprint for sophisticated debtors to transfer assets among corporate shells to shield them from creditors. Congress intended the discharge bar to do just the opposite — to foreclose, not encourage, such flagrant abuses of the Bankruptcy Code."
This is pretty obviouse also why the BOD and their hedge fund friends are scared so much.They feel fear as they should.Read the decision is from the last year?So it could be used today in our case.
And this one is also very valid because it gives some legally Points from the Court on why the Overturning decision happend and the BK was overturned.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
