[00:00:01] Speaker 04:
Please call the next case.

[00:00:03] Speaker 00:
Our next case is Enrae Willingham, Appellant Deepa Willingham appearing pro se, William Bell appearing for appellee.

[00:00:30] Speaker 04:
Morning, ma'am.

[00:00:31] Speaker 04:
Please come on up to the lectern.

[00:00:37] Speaker 04:
And you have 15 minutes to speak.

[00:00:38] Speaker 04:
I know this is kind of nerve-wracking for somebody who hasn't done this before, so...

[00:00:44] Speaker 04:
It's going to seem strange, but please think of it as like you have a conversation with us.

[00:00:49] Speaker 04:
So please go ahead.

[00:00:49] Speaker 01:
Oh, good morning, Your Honor.

[00:00:50] Speaker 01:
Good morning.

[00:00:51] Speaker 01:
First of all, I want to tell you that I'm very nervous presenting my case because I cannot afford legal counsel.

[00:01:01] Speaker 04:
Oh, I'm sorry.

[00:01:03] Speaker 04:
Like I mentioned before, you can save part of your 15 minutes to speak after Mr. Bell speaks.

[00:01:07] Speaker 04:
Do you want to save some time for that purpose?

[00:01:09] Speaker 01:
My dissertation is going to be very short, because I know how a cell works.

[00:01:15] Speaker 01:
I know how to set up schools.

[00:01:16] Speaker 01:
I know very little about your field.

[00:01:19] Speaker 01:
So it's not going to be much.

[00:01:20] Speaker 01:
OK, go ahead.

[00:01:21] Speaker 01:
I have a folder here.

[00:01:22] Speaker 01:
In my simple, non-legal mind, I wrote down things that I presented to the... Yes, please, go ahead.

[00:01:31] Speaker 04:
Does you have a copy for Mr. Bell?

[00:01:33] Speaker 01:
I have a copy for myself.

[00:01:35] Speaker 04:
I mean, for Mr. Bell.

[00:01:36] Speaker 01:
Oh, no, I do not have a copy for him.

[00:01:39] Speaker 04:
OK.

[00:01:39] Speaker 01:
Why don't you give him one of... I didn't know he was going to be here.

[00:01:42] Speaker 01:
Sorry.

[00:01:42] Speaker 04:
Are there any extras there?

[00:01:45] Speaker 04:
We're not going to look at that until you've gotten a copy.

[00:01:49] Speaker 04:
OK, good.

[00:01:50] Speaker 04:
Go ahead, please, ma'am.

[00:01:53] Speaker 01:
This episode of my divorce has been going on for six years.

[00:01:57] Speaker 01:
It was a surprise to me.

[00:01:59] Speaker 01:
And I found out all kinds of illegal things going on in order to defraud me from money that we community wise shared.

[00:02:11] Speaker 01:
And so when we filed the bankruptcy, I assumed that the bankruptcy court would provide me with some protection to get some of my legally owned money back to me.

[00:02:26] Speaker 01:
When I find out that

[00:02:29] Speaker 01:
it didn't provide the protection that I wanted or was hoped for and therefore I had to file this appeal and I'm hoping that I can in my simple way explain to you what it is that I want corrected that I don't feel was corrected.

[00:02:47] Speaker 01:
First was the homestead exemption.

[00:02:50] Speaker 01:
Homestead exemption as I understand it is that once a homestead

[00:02:57] Speaker 01:
To get the homesteading, you have to claim it in a state.

[00:03:00] Speaker 01:
And secondly, you have to be a resident of the state for a period of time.

[00:03:06] Speaker 01:
And then you can divide.

[00:03:08] Speaker 01:
If you have claimed and you have decided, then you're entitled to half of the proceeds in a married couple.

[00:03:15] Speaker 01:
So the amount was, it came to $288,000, one for him, one for me.

[00:03:25] Speaker 01:
But he had not put in a claim for the homestead in California.

[00:03:30] Speaker 01:
I also understand that California law says that when you apply for a homestead exemption, you can only do it in one state.

[00:03:38] Speaker 01:
He already had homestead exemption applied for our Houston house.

[00:03:42] Speaker 01:
And therefore, the entire amount of $175,000 or whatever should have come to me, because I am the claimant.

[00:03:51] Speaker 01:
And initially, the judge said it should come to me.

[00:03:55] Speaker 01:
But for some reason, as the proceeds went on, the judge changed his mind, and it went back to the trustee in Texas.

[00:04:04] Speaker 01:
I do not believe that is the correct interpretation of the law.

[00:04:08] Speaker 01:
My friend helped me discover the Schoenfeld case, which says that

[00:04:16] Speaker 01:
The exemption is provided for the state constitution.

[00:04:20] Speaker 01:
The lawyer of the Texas strategy was simply using the back door to get around the Schoenfeld case.

[00:04:25] Speaker 01:
Schoenfeld case says once the exemption is applied, it should not be diluted or done anything with.

[00:04:33] Speaker 01:
So that is my first objection, our reason for appeal.

[00:04:39] Speaker 01:
The second reason for my appeal is

[00:04:43] Speaker 01:
the Ralston house.

[00:04:45] Speaker 01:
He inherited the Ralston house from his father, which he is entitled to.

[00:04:51] Speaker 01:
But then we refinanced the house, and the loan was processed with community funds.

[00:04:59] Speaker 01:
And therefore, some of that money should come back to me.

[00:05:04] Speaker 01:
And biggest problem I understand that

[00:05:08] Speaker 01:
automatic stay once the bankruptcy was declared automatic stay that we he or I or our legal counsel could not sell against the automatic stay he stole sold defying the automatic stay sold it at the house was worth about three hundred thousand plus sold it for two fifty cash sale

[00:05:39] Speaker 01:
against ignoring the automatic stay and then he made some kind of deal with the person who bought, I'm sorry, can I have a little water?

[00:05:50] Speaker 04:
Of course, please go ahead.

[00:06:10] Speaker 01:
told it against the automatic stay and my trustee and my people did nothing to protect my interests.

[00:06:22] Speaker 01:
So that was the second point of objection that I had.

[00:06:29] Speaker 01:
Bottom line is, naively, I expected that the legal system in the United States, including the bankruptcy courts, will provide me with the protection I needed to protect my share of the assets.

[00:06:44] Speaker 01:
And it didn't happen.

[00:06:45] Speaker 01:
And so I'm here asking you to please consider my appeal based on my simple non-legal mind.

[00:06:57] Speaker 01:
What I would like to find relief for, instead I want to have the $88,000 returned from Texas.

[00:07:05] Speaker 01:
I want $127,500 for my right of reimbursement from the sale of Croft Lane.

[00:07:14] Speaker 01:
Ralston, there should be some kind of legal action against selling something, against defying all kinds of laws that I understand.

[00:07:25] Speaker 01:
Nantucket should be, I am the partial holder of the Nantucket property in Houston.

[00:07:32] Speaker 01:
And he also, by the way, as a backtrack, he refinanced all of these things without my knowledge.

[00:07:41] Speaker 01:
Okay.

[00:07:41] Speaker 01:
So at least 52,500 should be returned back to me for the deed of trust that I paid for.

[00:07:48] Speaker 01:
I reserve the right to bring action against the trustees for failing to restore Ralston back to me.

[00:07:55] Speaker 01:
I don't know why Mr. Namba did what he did.

[00:08:00] Speaker 01:
He may have reasons.

[00:08:01] Speaker 01:
I don't know.

[00:08:02] Speaker 01:
I'm not a lawyer.

[00:08:05] Speaker 01:
I want to see the copies of the income tax, because at this point, I do not trust anything my ex-husband did.

[00:08:11] Speaker 01:
And I deserve the right to cause a great mistake as innocent spouse under innocent spouse protection.

[00:08:21] Speaker 01:
And let's see.

[00:08:22] Speaker 01:
I think that's it.

[00:08:27] Speaker 01:
The biggest thing is I want what is legally, I am entitled to come back to me.

[00:08:36] Speaker 04:
I understand.

[00:08:36] Speaker 04:
Thank you.

[00:08:37] Speaker 01:
I'm sorry.

[00:08:38] Speaker 01:
I don't have any more expertise to express what I need.

[00:08:42] Speaker 01:
I'm a simple, ordinary Rotarian from a small town in California.

[00:08:47] Speaker 01:
I know humanitarian work.

[00:08:49] Speaker 01:
I do not know legal business.

[00:08:51] Speaker 01:
So if I said anything inappropriate, please forgive me.

[00:08:55] Speaker 04:
Nothing inappropriate at all.

[00:08:56] Speaker 04:
Thank you very much.

[00:08:57] Speaker 01:
Thank you.

[00:09:01] Speaker 04:
Mr. Bill.

[00:09:03] Speaker 03:
I'm William Bell, Bell and Burkhardt APC.

[00:09:06] Speaker 03:
I represented Jerry Namba, Chapter 7 trustee in this case.

[00:09:11] Speaker 03:
And I want to first kind of apologize to the panel because

[00:09:16] Speaker 03:
I think we'd rather have a better record than we do in this case normally.

[00:09:20] Speaker 03:
I understand completely how both this court and the bankruptcy court have really tried to be as flexible as possible to permit a pro-per to have her rights enforced.

[00:09:33] Speaker 03:
But the way things went out was first she filed something that the court deemed unofficial or an informal brief and then I wrote my brief and

[00:09:43] Speaker 03:
Then I think just a couple of weeks ago, she filed a reply brief that had things in it that were never in the initial file and that I've never had a chance to respond to or create a record for.

[00:09:54] Speaker 03:
And I apologize for my part in that.

[00:09:56] Speaker 03:
But look, I want to talk a little bit about how this case started and what we did.

[00:10:01] Speaker 03:
So the beginning of the case, I'm sure the panel's been able to tell that most of Ms.

[00:10:08] Speaker 03:
Willingham's problems are not with my client, the trustee, they're with her ex-husband.

[00:10:12] Speaker 03:
and her ex-husband's trustee because he also filed a Chapter 7 case back in Houston.

[00:10:17] Speaker 03:
So we had both the ex-husband at some points involved in our case and the ex-husband's trustee.

[00:10:24] Speaker 03:
So what happened was, just before the filing of the bankruptcy case, Ms.

[00:10:29] Speaker 03:
Willingham had gone to a dissolution mediation.

[00:10:33] Speaker 03:
And entered into, I don't remember the details of it, but it was a horrible deal for her.

[00:10:39] Speaker 03:
Just horrible.

[00:10:40] Speaker 03:
She had given away the entire store of her marital community.

[00:10:44] Speaker 03:
I believe Texas is also a community property state.

[00:10:47] Speaker 03:
I know Washington is.

[00:10:48] Speaker 03:
I don't know about Hawaii or Arizona, but anyway.

[00:10:51] Speaker 03:
so but but in any event she entered into a terrible agreement and then she came back she's been living in the Santa Barbara area northern Santa Barbara County or she was and she came back and she talked to an attorney there who was a young guy but a competent bankruptcy lawyers named Rita Olmstead

[00:11:09] Speaker 03:
And Reed got the idea that if he filed a Chapter 7 case, all the property would come in and become property of the estate before this mediation agreement could harden into a judgment in the Texas court.

[00:11:20] Speaker 03:
So that's what he did.

[00:11:21] Speaker 03:
And he filed the case, and that gave her the right to share in her house in Santa Ynez in a way that I don't think she would have been able to, or at least to a degree she wouldn't have been able to.

[00:11:33] Speaker 03:
I don't remember the exact details.

[00:11:35] Speaker 03:
of the agreement that she made.

[00:11:37] Speaker 03:
But I remember that the first thing I did in the case was I had to appear in a hearing in the state court in Texas, appear specially because of course I'm not licensed to practice in Texas, and tell them that they weren't able to enter a judgment based on the mediation award, whatever Texas law said, because it was going to impact property of the estate and that was going to be a contempt of my bankruptcy court.

[00:11:59] Speaker 03:
And the Texas court did not enter the judgment.

[00:12:02] Speaker 03:
So now we have the ability to liquidate the assets back in the California Bankruptcy Court.

[00:12:09] Speaker 03:
And, you know, in a lot of cases, the debtor doesn't want you to sell their home, but in this case, the debtor did want us to sell her home because that was going to give her the right to the homestead and get her debts paid.

[00:12:21] Speaker 03:
I think some of the debts weren't even getting paid out of the mediation agreement that she entered into.

[00:12:27] Speaker 03:
So we went forward and we sold her house.

[00:12:29] Speaker 03:
And her homestead, she being over I believe 65 was at that time the age, was the upgraded homestead in California of $175,000.

[00:12:38] Speaker 03:
That's less than it is now by

[00:12:42] Speaker 03:
a factor of several, but at that time that was the best you could do.

[00:12:46] Speaker 03:
And so we sold our house and we filed a motion to sell and we said we're going to pay the secured claims, the liens and the cost of sale and we're going to give her her $175,000 homestead.

[00:12:59] Speaker 03:
It was all in the motion.

[00:13:01] Speaker 03:
So we filed that motion and we came in, but prior to the motion, and I believe fairly shortly prior, the Texas trustee, because by then her ex had filed a bankruptcy case in Texas.

[00:13:12] Speaker 03:
And we were constantly battling between the two bankruptcy cases, making sure that what we did didn't violate the Texas stay and what they did didn't violate the California stay.

[00:13:23] Speaker 03:
I don't really think that was an issue because I think all the community property was in the California court.

[00:13:28] Speaker 03:
and that there wouldn't have been anything, but Judge Barish was concerned about this.

[00:13:32] Speaker 03:
I said, well, he should have been.

[00:13:34] Speaker 03:
And so the Texas trustee and I entered into various agreements about what could be done and what couldn't be done without violating each other's stay.

[00:13:44] Speaker 03:
But we got the property sold, and the Texas trustee came in and said, gosh, I ought to get half the homestead.

[00:13:49] Speaker 03:
And Judge Barish said, well, okay, there's a dispute, so I want you to hold the homestead, he said to my client, Mr. Nama.

[00:14:00] Speaker 03:
And Mr. Olmsted, at that point, said, well, we got to have some money because she's got to move.

[00:14:06] Speaker 03:
And that's always a concern.

[00:14:08] Speaker 03:
You don't, you know, you're selling a debtor's homestead, and that's where she's been living there for years and years.

[00:14:13] Speaker 03:
She's got all kinds of stuff there.

[00:14:15] Speaker 03:
But she needs to get another place.

[00:14:17] Speaker 03:
So it was eventually worked out that she got half the homestead.

[00:14:21] Speaker 03:
And there's this 87 versus 88,000 thing, which I just think is a little bit of a red herring.

[00:14:27] Speaker 03:
But she got 87,000.

[00:14:29] Speaker 03:
And the other 88 held until Judge Barish could hear from the Texas trustee.

[00:14:37] Speaker 03:
I don't believe it was Mr. Willingham.

[00:14:38] Speaker 03:
I'm pretty sure it was Mr. Williams who was his trustee that wanted half the homestead.

[00:14:43] Speaker 03:
And then the other, between Ms.

[00:14:47] Speaker 03:
Willingham and the Texas trustee about who was going to get the other half of the homestead.

[00:14:52] Speaker 03:
And then there was a hearing.

[00:14:53] Speaker 03:
And we don't have any, you know, the trustee doesn't have any interest in that at all.

[00:14:58] Speaker 03:
Tell us who to pay the money to and we'll pay the money.

[00:15:00] Speaker 03:
It's not ours, you know.

[00:15:02] Speaker 03:
And so the court ruled eventually, Judge Barish did, I believe was what happened, is that he said, well,

[00:15:11] Speaker 03:
This is no longer my issue, because once we've decided this is the homestead, that property's out of my estate, and I'm going to let others argue about it.

[00:15:22] Speaker 03:
And I don't think that the ruling was that we give the money to the Texas trustee, and I might be wrong about this, but I believe that he said, go figure this out in Texas.

[00:15:33] Speaker 03:
And whatever happened in Texas, we eventually gave that half of the homestead to the Texas trustee.

[00:15:39] Speaker 03:
And then I never heard from him again, which leads me to believe that perhaps that was enough money for him to pay the debts of his estate.

[00:15:46] Speaker 03:
And then, you know, then he was done just kind of like I was done at the same time, because we had enough money, but then with the net proceeds of the property, we

[00:15:56] Speaker 03:
We paid the creditors with interest, and then we gave Ms.

[00:16:00] Speaker 03:
Willingham back another $100,000.

[00:16:02] Speaker 03:
So she actually got $106, if I'm not mistaken.

[00:16:08] Speaker 03:
So she actually got $193,000, and the Texas trustee got 88.

[00:16:12] Speaker 03:
In fact, although that was because it was a surplus case, it wasn't part of her homestead, she actually got considerably more of the consideration than her ex did.

[00:16:23] Speaker 04:
Let me stop you for a second, because I think Ms.

[00:16:25] Speaker 04:
Willingham's basic point is that she thinks she has claims against her ex-husband.

[00:16:31] Speaker 04:
Yes.

[00:16:31] Speaker 04:
Put that into bankruptcy terms, those claims would become property of the estate.

[00:16:35] Speaker 04:
Yes.

[00:16:36] Speaker 04:
Under the control of the trustee.

[00:16:38] Speaker 04:
Yes.

[00:16:39] Speaker 04:
And she doesn't understand, I think, why the trustee didn't take those claims and assert them.

[00:16:43] Speaker 04:
Right.

[00:16:44] Speaker 04:
So what's your response to that?

[00:16:45] Speaker 03:
Sure.

[00:16:46] Speaker 03:
And the answer is we didn't need to.

[00:16:48] Speaker 03:
We had enough money to pay everybody.

[00:16:50] Speaker 04:
everybody of the creditors.

[00:16:52] Speaker 03:
The creditors, correct.

[00:16:53] Speaker 04:
But there could have been more money for Ms.

[00:16:55] Speaker 04:
Willihan.

[00:16:55] Speaker 03:
But we abandoned those assets to her.

[00:16:58] Speaker 03:
And the closing of the case gave her all those rights back.

[00:17:02] Speaker 03:
Now, again, she was operating a tremendous disadvantage in Texas, because her counsel, I think she had counsel at one point, and just poor, and she was in California, and I'm sure that whatever happened in Texas didn't happen well, probably not even fairly for her, and that's too bad.

[00:17:24] Speaker 03:
But at the same time, I was talking to my son, who's a very young bankruptcy lawyer,

[00:17:30] Speaker 03:
And he said, well, gosh, he represents trustees, too.

[00:17:35] Speaker 03:
And he said, if you have two properties and you got to sell one to pay the creditors, which one do you sell?

[00:17:41] Speaker 03:
And I said, the easier one to sell.

[00:17:44] Speaker 03:
And he said, well, yeah, unless you're those other kind of trustee lawyers, when you sell the one that's going to require more fees to sell.

[00:17:50] Speaker 03:
And he was joking with me.

[00:17:52] Speaker 03:
But in fact, what you do is you take the low-hanging fruit.

[00:17:55] Speaker 03:
That's what you do as a trustee.

[00:17:56] Speaker 04:
I think what you're saying is that the trustee basically has a choice, subject to court approval.

[00:18:02] Speaker 04:
You can take an asset of the estate, which can include a claim against somebody else.

[00:18:06] Speaker 04:
You could administer it.

[00:18:07] Speaker 04:
You could prosecute that claim or whatever.

[00:18:09] Speaker 04:
Or the trustee could say, in my business judgment, I don't think that's in the best interest of the estate.

[00:18:14] Speaker 04:
I'm going to let these claims go back to the debtor, and she can then make what she wants.

[00:18:18] Speaker 04:
But the trustee is not forced

[00:18:21] Speaker 04:
by the law to incur expenses to prosecute claims necessarily for the benefit of the debtor.

[00:18:26] Speaker 03:
Right, and that Raulston property that she's talked about, and it was a situation where it was her ex's separate property and then the community made payments.

[00:18:38] Speaker 03:
And this happens all the time in California.

[00:18:40] Speaker 03:
And what happens is that you have one spouse has a piece of separate property, and then the community makes some of the payments on it.

[00:18:49] Speaker 03:
And by doing that, it does get an incremental community property interest in the property, but it's usually quite small.

[00:18:57] Speaker 03:
you know now here there was a refinance so maybe it was a little bigger but um but again trying to liquidate that would have been far more difficult than taking the property it was clearly community property and in fact that she was specifically asking us to sell because it gave her her homestead which was quite a quite a lot of money yeah

[00:19:20] Speaker 02:
If I'm naive on this, you understand the record better than, you know, I've gone through it.

[00:19:24] Speaker 02:
On the decision of the 87-88 division, there is not an order

[00:19:33] Speaker 02:
on appeal that we're looking at dealing with the 88 going to Texas, is there?

[00:19:39] Speaker 03:
Well, I think that the appeal is technically of the closing of the case, which isn't even an order.

[00:19:47] Speaker 03:
It's a ministerial act by the clerk.

[00:19:50] Speaker 02:
Whether it is an order or not, but as to this, looking at an order, I think that she's very concerned about the 88 going to Texas.

[00:20:02] Speaker 02:
and if there was an order authorizing the 88 going to Texas, and she wanted to appeal that, but I don't know that there is an order authorizing the 88 to go to Texas that's been appealed.

[00:20:14] Speaker 03:
Something must have happened because we paid the money out, and the trustee would not have paid the money without some kind of an order, but I'm not sure exactly what happened.

[00:20:23] Speaker 02:
Give me the timing of when this appeal was filed and when the 88 went to Texas.

[00:20:27] Speaker 03:
Oh, you know, a year and a half later.

[00:20:30] Speaker 03:
I mean, a long time.

[00:20:32] Speaker 03:
And then we went through just a few things that the Nantucket property that she referred to again that I think that this is the one that her ex had claimed as his homestead in Houston.

[00:20:43] Speaker 03:
once again any right she had in that that was abandoned to her and at the time we closed the case that asset like whatever she had in Ralston and whatever claims she had against her ex for fraud or

[00:20:58] Speaker 03:
you know, self-dealing or whatever it is he did.

[00:21:01] Speaker 03:
Those things all went.

[00:21:03] Speaker 03:
One other issue, she talked about a tax return.

[00:21:06] Speaker 03:
And again, I think this is just a failure to understand the Chapter 7 system.

[00:21:11] Speaker 03:
The trustee in bankruptcy filed an estate tax return.

[00:21:15] Speaker 03:
It had only to do with what the bankruptcy estate received and the taxes that the bankruptcy estate might owe.

[00:21:23] Speaker 03:
And Ms.

[00:21:24] Speaker 03:
Willingham has said she wants to see it, but it doesn't have anything to do with her.

[00:21:28] Speaker 04:
Do you have any problem giving it to her?

[00:21:31] Speaker 04:
I tend to agree with you.

[00:21:31] Speaker 04:
It probably won't answer the question she's looking for.

[00:21:34] Speaker 04:
But doesn't she have a right to receive it?

[00:21:36] Speaker 03:
I really don't have a trouble with doing that.

[00:21:38] Speaker 03:
I could ask the trustee.

[00:21:40] Speaker 03:
This came up relatively recently, I think, within the last week or two.

[00:21:44] Speaker 03:
But I guess I could ask the trustee if he can find it still.

[00:21:47] Speaker 03:
This is kind of an old file.

[00:21:49] Speaker 04:
it might be more interesting to see what the texas trustee filed or what the ex-husband filed but yeah it seems to be that the trustee in california ought to give that return to miss william even though i suspect like you do wouldn't answer a lot of questions unfortunate well it's going to show that we got the money and from the sale of the property and and and of course we may have

[00:22:09] Speaker 03:
had to look at whether we had a capital gain on that property.

[00:22:12] Speaker 03:
That's normally the thing that you'd be most concerned about in a state tax return, but I don't remember paying a bunch of capital gains, so perhaps there was an exception for that that we were able to use.

[00:22:22] Speaker 03:
I don't remember the details, and of course, I don't do the tax returns.

[00:22:26] Speaker 03:
We have somebody in the accounting area.

[00:22:30] Speaker 03:
Happy to answer any other questions.

[00:22:32] Speaker 04:
More questions?

[00:22:33] Speaker 04:
Okay, thank you very much.

[00:22:34] Speaker 04:
Thank you very much.

[00:22:36] Speaker 04:
uh... miss willing ham you've got some time left if you'd like to tell us anything more you've got uh... seven minutes left on your time you don't have to if you don't want to it's totally optional but we'd be happy to

[00:23:04] Speaker 01:
Again, Your Honor, I didn't understand everything that Mr. Will said.

[00:23:11] Speaker 01:
As a little background, the first time when Mr. Namba called me, after the bankruptcy was wild, his first question he asked me was, you have filled out your form, bankruptcy form, listing your assets and your liabilities correctly?

[00:23:30] Speaker 01:
I said, yes, Your Honor.

[00:23:32] Speaker 01:
We were doing telephone interview.

[00:23:35] Speaker 01:
And he said, you found out about your liabilities from a credit report?

[00:23:40] Speaker 01:
I said, yes, Your Honor, because I didn't know any of these debts that I'm supposed to be responsible for.

[00:23:48] Speaker 01:
So I naively thought that Mr. Namba was working on my behalf.

[00:23:54] Speaker 01:
But as the time went on, I saw that he was motivated by some other factor that

[00:24:01] Speaker 01:
didn't provide me with the protection I thought it would be providing.

[00:24:07] Speaker 01:
And the February 19, 2021, Central District Court of California Northern Division, we fire Mr. Will Pyle the response to.

[00:24:20] Speaker 01:
So I don't have any more ideas as to what I am legally entitled to.

[00:24:27] Speaker 01:
My logical mind, I have a scientific logical mind, tells me that somehow or other with all these fraudulent activities, and I documented all of them after doing my research, when my husband of 40 years was not behaving normally, I did the research and found out about all these second mortgages, all the 12 credit cards maxed out, et cetera, et cetera.

[00:24:53] Speaker 01:
by just sitting on the computer and tapping on little things.

[00:24:57] Speaker 01:
So I don't have any... I know my logical mind tells me the legal system should work better than protecting innocent victims like me.

[00:25:07] Speaker 01:
That's what my expectation was.

[00:25:09] Speaker 01:
And somehow or other, I'm very sorry that that didn't happen.

[00:25:13] Speaker 01:
I'm hoping that my last resort is this court will look at it from a fair point of view.

[00:25:21] Speaker 02:
When the counsel for the trustee was talking about assets being abandoned, do you understand what he was saying there?

[00:25:30] Speaker 02:
I'm sorry?

[00:25:31] Speaker 02:
I'm not sure.

[00:25:31] Speaker 02:
Is my mic on?

[00:25:38] Speaker 02:
I'll try to speak louder.

[00:25:40] Speaker 02:
Can you hear me?

[00:25:43] Speaker 02:
The counsel for the trustee was talking about abandoning assets.

[00:25:49] Speaker 02:
Do you understand what he meant by that?

[00:25:55] Speaker 02:
It was the term of abandonment when the trustee had there were claims that they could pursue and if the trustee didn't pursue those those became yours.

[00:26:07] Speaker 02:
It's not that those claims may have gone away but it's not is the trustee is not going to be pursuing those those would be back with you.

[00:26:15] Speaker 01:
Yeah I expected the trustee to do a follow-up but it didn't happen and trustee also the

[00:26:24] Speaker 01:
The property, Croft Lane, was going price was 3.2 million, sold for 1.9.

[00:26:33] Speaker 01:
The farm equipment was sold for several thousand dollars less than going.

[00:26:38] Speaker 01:
Even the seller brought it back.

[00:26:41] Speaker 01:
These kinds of things happening and I don't know why it was happening and what I needed to do to correct the situation.

[00:26:48] Speaker 01:
The only thing I could come up with is to appeal my case.

[00:26:52] Speaker 01:
I don't have, again, I don't have a legal mind.

[00:26:55] Speaker 01:
I don't know anything about your field.

[00:26:58] Speaker 01:
I can only do some research on the computer and come up with something that will appeal to all of you.

[00:27:08] Speaker 04:
Thank you, sir.

[00:27:17] Speaker 03:
Let's give her one shot then we'll There was a question about the order that was entered for the 88,000 and ms.

[00:27:29] Speaker 03:
Willingham in her 7b which was just recently filed has the supplemental order which is dated February 19th 2021 and it said if I don't hear from Texas or my mr. Nama doesn't hear from Texas and

[00:27:46] Speaker 03:
In 14 days, I'm to give the funds to her.

[00:27:48] Speaker 03:
Apparently, we did because then there's 7C, which is an April 9th, 2021 order.

[00:27:54] Speaker 03:
Again, we're talking two and a half years ago now that was an order to disperse funds to the Texas.

[00:28:02] Speaker 03:
And I don't see the motion, but what happened obviously was they got an order in Texas that the money was to be sent there.

[00:28:10] Speaker 03:
Then the Texas trustee made a motion in our court to have the money dispersed.

[00:28:16] Speaker 03:
And and the order of dispersion is a disperse to the Texas trustee is is on April 9th, 2021 and it's document 107 in our case.

[00:28:27] Speaker 02:
That helps April 9 2021.

[00:28:30] Speaker 03:
Yeah, it's it's 103 was the motion 107 was the order.

[00:28:36] Speaker 04:
Are those the documents you wanted to point out to us?

[00:28:41] Speaker 04:
Right, OK.

[00:28:42] Speaker 01:
I have one question, Your Honor.

[00:28:45] Speaker 01:
I would like to know why the trustee did not go when he broke the stay law.

[00:28:53] Speaker 01:
Why didn't the trustee go after him?

[00:28:57] Speaker 01:
To me, logically, if you're breaking a law blatantly, it should have something to do with it.

[00:29:03] Speaker 04:
Well, thank you very much.

[00:29:04] Speaker 04:
We're gonna be providing a written decision.

[00:29:06] Speaker 04:
I hope it'll help clarify things for both sides and that you'll be getting that shortly Thank you.

[00:29:12] Speaker 04:
Thank you very much.

[00:29:13] Speaker 04:
Thank you It includes the calendar so courts and recess all rise