Kevin Padrick was under contract with the Debtor in the Summit Bankruptcy, then Was appointed Trustee, is this Legal?

Can a Department of Justice, Court Appointed Trustee be a Legally Defined Insider?

Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox has Some Questions for the FBI, the Department of Justice and anyone out there who actually provides any kind of Monitoring of the Bankruptcy Courts or in any way Enforces the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. 

Certainly Judge Dunn, the Bankruptcy Judge in this case, knew that Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group was under contract with Obsidian to Advise them - there were press releases from Sussman Shank Attorney Susan Ford that discussed Obsidian being on board, the attorneys of the Principals knew that "Obsidian" was on board as you see in the transcription of the meeting BEFORE Kevin Padrick showed up to that Summit Meeting.  Is Judge Dunn Liable ?  Will the Oregon Tax Payers end up paying a huge settlement when possibly the Summit Creditors Sue Judge Dunn Personally and Professionally?

I Believe the Summit Creditor, Investors and Even Summit Principals can file a class action lawsuit against Obsidian Finance Group, Kevin Padrick, David Brown, Pamela Griffith and the Department of Justice, Judge Randal Dunn, the Bend DA Office, Perkins Coie, Sussman Shank, Susan Ford, Steven Hedberg, Annie Buell, the Tennant Family, Tonkon Torp, David Aman and Leon Simpson ~ As I believe they all acted in conspiracy to get Kevin Padrick the Trustee job and to divert the DOJ and FBI to focus on the Summit Principals while Kevin Padrick ran away with everyone's money.

Why did a Federal Bankruptcy Judge appoint what looks to me like a legally defined "Insider" as a Trustee" ?  Was Kevin Padrick an "Insider" and "Interested" party by law and therefore NOT Legally Qualified to be the Trustee of the Summit Bankruptcy?

Did the Department of Justice Trustee, Judge Randall Dunn, Steven Hedberg of Perkins Coie and Tom Stilley of Sussman Shank act in conspiracy to get Kevin Padrick this very lucrative Trustee job?  And if so, well then who was the real "Oversight" to provide any kind of transparency and accountability for the Investors and Creditors? Where was the Department Of Justice in making sure that Kevin Padrick was providing a service that was of the "Highest Fiduciary Duty"?

The actions of the DOJ, the Bankruptcy Judge and the Attorneys for the Creditor and the Debtors makes no legal or ethical sense to me and is certainly not of the highest fiduciary duty.  I would say, in my OPINION that Judge Randall Dunn has some serious Explaining to do and possibly some Lawsuits of his own to face.

I am not claiming I know Law, thing is Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) sure seems to me to be suggesting that as a legally defined Insider, under contract to advise the Debtor, that Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group was not legally allowed to be "appointed" as the Trustee in the Summit Bankruptcy, I don't Know this for Fact, I am not a Bankruptcy Attorney.  However, I will point you to some links of interest to do your own homework.

Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)

"(14) The term "disinterested person" means a person that--

(A) is not a creditor, an equity security holder, or an insider;

(B) is not and was not, within 2 years before the date of the filing of the petition, a director, officer, or employee of the debtor; and

(C) does not have an interest materially adverse to the interest of the estate or of any class of creditors or equity security holders, by reason of any direct or indirect relationship to, connection with, or interest in, the debtor, or for any other reason.

Above Quoted from
http://doney.net/bkcode/11usc0101.htm

One thing that jumps out at me is property must be transferred to a "disinterested party" right? And as above in the bankruptcy code we note the definition of "disinterested party" NOT an Insider, and Kevin Padrick was an "Insider" from the way I see it.

Wasn't Kevin Padrick in "control" of the "debtor" and thereby again an insider?  He seemed to have advised them on all this BEFORE he was the Trustee working against them, is this Legal?  Really? It certainly must be unethically for an Oregon Attorney to provide financial advise to a company, take their personal financial data and use it against them.  It must be a "breach of contract" at the very least, right? As Kevin Padrick was under contract with Summit, though at my Trial (Obsidian V. Cox) I asked Kevin Padrick if he had a contract with Summit and he said he did not, of which others at Obsidian later admitted they did have a signed contract, and took $100,000 of Summit's money.  

Kevin Padrick, Obsidian Finance Group was under contract to assist Summit to form a plan of reorganization and instead drove them further into problems, and took a workable situation financially and basically drowned his own clients ensuring they file bankruptcy and could not reorganize and therefore Kevin Padrick would get massive commissions on each asset SOLD and get HUGE fees for services with No Oversight.

Stephanie DeYoung, Mark Knowles, Jim Hull filed an Objection to these Outrageous Fees, and serial Plaintiff Kevin Padrick put them under so much duress they gave up, and though not based in law or bankruptcy code, Kevin Padrick, with his attorney David Aman ... well he got his way.  The Objection went away, yet Kevin Padrick was called out again in the Homestreet / Cascadia Project LLC legal battle where Homestreet bank objected to Kevin Padrick's fees and conflicts of interest.  Homestreet WON, where bankruptcy whistleblower and mother of 3 Stephanie DeYoung was forced to stand down, though their Objection to the Fees was thorough, truthful and was a legitimate objection.

See Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group had the debtors books, had spreadsheets on the Debtors Assets and Personal Financial Information and WAS an Insider, it seems to me.  Therefore, In my Opinion, He had NO BUSINESS working for the Creditors in this Case nor being appointed as the Trustee, in my Opinion and the way I see the Laws, from my Non-Lawyer interpretation.

the Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) ("insiders" include an 6 "officer","person in control of the debtor", "affiliate, or insider of an affiliate as if such affiliate were the debtor", and "managing agent of the debtor").

Bankruptcy Code on Duties of Trustee and Examinerhttp://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_11_00001106----000-.html

This talks about investigations into debtors debt, see Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group already had this information in Great Detail, as he was an Insider, under contract, under "control" of the Debtors, yet he became Trustee and SEEMED to charge the estate to investigate what he was already paid to look into by the Summit Principals, his Client.

This is for the Courts to Decide and to Look at But I Certainly Do Raise the Question:

Can a Legally Defined "Insider" of the Debtor be Appointed 

as a Trustee in a 40 Million Dollar Bankruptcy Case?

Also Note that Sussman Shank, Attorney for the Summit Principals did not object and seemed in fact to agree with Judge Dunn in appointing Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance when it looks like days before THIS SAME Attorney,  Sussman Shank's Lead Attorney Susan Ford said in an email to Steven Hedberg of Perkins Coie (Lead Attorney for the Creditors Committee who at one time worked under Kevin Padrick at Miller Nash), to Tom Stilley (Assistant Attorney for Sussman and Shank), to Jeanette Thomas ( Perkins Coie Attorney for Creditors' Committee), and to Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group that  """There was significant concern that such a proposal would be "dead on arrival" and might even lead to a Motion by the UST to appoint a Trustee, which would not benefit the creditors.""

 Click Here for a link to that email. 

So what happened, who is liable, where is the highest fiduciary duty ?


They ALL, surely seemed to know that Kevin Padrick Was Legally Defined in Bankruptcy Code as an Insider and yet they all looked the other way, why? And if it is not illegal then certainly Kevin Padrick should be filed against with the Oregon State Bar as an Ethics Violation, at the least, Right?

The Summit case involves victims (Creditors and Investors) in multiple states, who is really liable?  Accountable?  I would say to start with, the Victims need to sue the Department of Justice and those personally involved in the oversight duties of the Summit Bankruptcy in which Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group was allegedly to answer to.

Also think about this, as thought to consider, it is Tax Code, in a 1031 Exchange that Property, such as
the Assets and LLC's involved in the Summit Bankruptcy that this be transferred to a "Disinterested Party"
which it SEEMS that by Law Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group Was not.  So is this a Violation of
Tax Code regarding 1031 Exchanges?

Did Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group retain a "Qualified Intermediary" for the 1031 Exchange
Transactions, seeings how it seems to me that Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group was NOT
a "disinterested party" as I believe the law states that an intermediary must be ???

Did Kevin Patrick's past connection with Miller Nash and Working with Steve Hedberg there present a Legal Conflict of Interest in the Summit Bankruptc as Kevin Padrick being appointed by Judge Dunn to be the Trustee?  Why did Sussman Shank agree to this appointment, when days before Lead Attorney  Susan Ford of Sussman Shank flat out said that this was not in the best interest of the Creditors?

Why did Kevin Padrick bill the Summit Creditors for a meeting with Steve Hedberg, Perkins Coie (Lead Attorney for the Creditors Committee who at one time worked under Kevin Padrick at Miller Nash), and Tom Stilley  (Assistant Attorney for Sussman and Shank)  to discuss replacing Terry Vance as CRO?  This can be seen discussed  in Judicial Proceeding Case No. 08-37031 rld11 in Billable Hours.

Terry Vance was doing a fine job, from all I have read and Susan Ford Lead Attorney with Sussman Shank was allegedly out of town when Tom Stilley, Sussman Shank was involved in this.  So, was Tom Stilley Connected in any Conflict of Interest Ways?

Why did Sussman Shank agree, knowing full well that Kevin Padrick was Legally Defined as an Insider by way of Contract with the Summit Principals to work for them?

Didn't Susan Ford, Sussman Shank talk about Obsidian being "retained" in this Press Release
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/summitwebsiteannouncement.pdf
Therefore Susan Ford of Sussman Shank knew full well that in Bankruptcy Code Kevin Padrick was Defined Legally as an Insider.

So why did Sussman Shank NOT object to Judge Randall Dunn appointing Kevin Padrick of Obsidian Finance Group as the Trustee in the Summit Bankruptcy ? Why did the courts appoint a trustee based on an oral motion without any prior notice to parties in interest? Why was an individual, Kevin Padrick appointed as a United States Trustee? Certainly all these questions are of Public Concern?

Kevin Padrick, Obsidian Finance Group, Summit 1031 Bankruptcy Trustee had past close working connections with Steve Hedberg, Perkins Coie who in the Summit Bankruptcy was / is Lead Attorney for the Creditors Committee.  Steven Hedberg, it is my understanding at one time worked under Kevin Padrick when they were both at Miller Nash Law Firm.

Kevin Padrick, Obsidian Finance Group, Summit 1031 Bankruptcy Trustee also seems to have past affiliations with the founder of Sussman Shank, as shown here http://www.sussmanshank.com/gtruths.asp .  Yes represented against as with Miller Nash, thing is there is certainly reason to question a Conflict of Interest, a History with Sussman Shank in some way and YET again, in My Opinion, had no legal right to be appointed as Trustee and if so, certainly no Ethical Reason, Right?

Kevin Padrick, Obsidian Finance Group, seems to me to be a seriously conflicted Bankruptcy Trustee as he was an insider, legally defined, I believe, and had conflicts of interest with the Creditors' Committee Attorney Steven Hedberg and Seemingly with Sussman Shank.

Kevin Padrick was under contract with the Debtor to give them financial advice, as noted in the Sussman Shank, Susan Ford Press Release, which makes him an "insider" right legally?  This makes him NOT a "disinterested party" RIGHT?

Then, after this, he was "appointed" as Trustee by a Federal Bankruptcy Judge, Judge Randall Dunn, after Sussman Shank Attorney Susan Ford Advised that this is NOT in the Best Interest of the Creditors. And Sussman Shank made no objection to this, what seems to me to be a serious conflict of interest, Why?

Also note that Tonkon Torp was making Tons of money and as this quote says "Kevin knew he could get Leon Simson on board and therefore, possibly Pamela Griffith." Source of Quote - http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/?p=1628  ~ Pamela Griffith is the Department of Justice U.S. Trustee that was supposed to watch over the actions of the Trustee (Kevin Padrick) and in my opinion she was conflicted as she used to work with Leon Simson of Tonkon Torp Law Firm and Tonkon Torp Leon Simson and Tonkon Torp David Aman stood to make a whole lot of money from Kevin Padrick being the Trustee in the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy.

 Lot's Of Questions and Seemingly No One in a Position of Authority to Ask them To.

I believe that the law states that as someone with knowledge of a crime, or possible crime, you can file a Criminal Complaint, more on that Soon, if I can I will be filing Criminal Complaints and Stating the Codes Violated and why I believe it to be so.

The Debtors Financial Adviser becomes the Trustee working against the Debtor?  

Does No One See an Issue with this???

Links and Resources to this Post

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_11_00001106----000-.html

http://www.chapter11trustee.com/2011/01/possible-bankruptcy-code-violations-in.html

http://www.bankruptcyaction.com/bankruptcydictionary.htm

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_11_00001106----000-.html

Here are research links to More on the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy, Kevin Padrick, David, Aman, Tonkon Torp, Perkins Coie, Judge Randall Dunny, Steven Hedberg.

My Blog on Obsidian Finance Group
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/

Stephanie DeYoung Summit Bankruptcy Whistle Blower Blog, NOT Mine
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/

Documents I gave the courts to prove the source of the post
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2011/12/in-obsidian-v-cox-i-provided.html

Here is Exhibit 520 that I gave Judge Marco Hernandez, Portland Oregon 

To Show the Source of the Post I was on Trial For. 

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/111075477/Exhibit-520-Statement-of-Source-of-Blog-Post

Obsidian V. Cox Trial Transcripts
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/117800653/Obsidian-V-Cox-Trial-Transcripts


Meeting Videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/KevinPadrick


Court Filing Against Tonkon Torp and Obsidian Finance Group
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/98076240/David-Aman-Tonkon-Torp-for-Obsidian-Finance-Group-Trustee-Kevin-Padrick

Posted Here Proudly
by Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox
SavvyBroker@Yahoo.com