Bankruptcy
Fraud
Family on Family Crime

As
Donna Sturman waits for the New York U.S. Trustee to provide justice,
a bankruptcy trustee has kept her brothers' bankruptcy case open since
1989, billing it $5 million and is seeking another $2 million.
Donna says her brothers stole her inheritance and now the bankruptcy
trustee is stealing it under the guise of administering the case.

Sufficient
Evidence
Donna
is among the growing number of Americans coming forward with horror
stories of a dysfunctional bankruptcy system that allows its employees
to prey on people while the U.S. Trustee that is supposed to provide
justice, just seems to turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed
under its nose.
Donna
says her brothers filed bankruptcy to wash their hands of their crime.
She
has filed numerous criminal complaints and sought justice from the U.S.
Trustee's Office in New York (watchdogs of bankruptcy-related crimes)
to be told "Insufficient Evidence" or "Not Our Jurisdiction."
Meanwhile,
Donna is a pauper has been unable to get justice, or her money returned
to her.
The evidence
below will show that there is more than sufficient evidence to prosecute
and convict the guilty parties for the frauds against Donna. As Donna
waits for justice from the U.S. Trustee's Office, we put the question
to you: Are the crimes against Donna prosecutable?
We want
you to decide for yourself. If, after reviewing Donna's story and you
believe that justice for Donna Sturman should be pursued, we hope you
will help influence the U.S. Trustee's Office in New York to provide
justice.
***
Posted:
Jan. 8, 2003
The
Betrayal
Donna
Sturman is one of four children (the other three, brothers, are the
debtors in this case). The brothers, Wayne Sturman, Bruce Sturman,
and Howard Sturman, are much older than Donna.
Their
father was a successful and wealthy real estate developer in New York.
When he died in 1979, the four children inherited sizeable assets with
the bulk going to their mother.
Mrs. Sturman, however, died in 1980 leaving equal shares of her substantial
assets to her four children. Howard Sturman and Joseph Warren were the
executors of that estate.
Donna
has asserted in her legal filings that instead of properly managing the
assets of the estates, Howard, Bruce and Wayne Sturman operated the properties
and entities owning them so as to purposely deprive Donna of her rights
and her share of profits and excluded her from management.
Donna
goes on to claim that the Sturman brothers received extraordinary management
fees; siphoned millions of dollars through unknown and unauthorized "loans
to stockholders" for personal purposes; paid extraordinary personal
expenses with assets of the estates; failed to repay "loans"
from the Muriel Estate; borrowed some $75 million from various banks and,
as security for their loans, mortgaged / pledged the inherited real estate,
ultra vires, in which Donna had a 25 percent interest; and to this date
the brothers have failed to provide a proper accounting.
Instead
of using the proceeds for proper business purposes, the brothers used
the vast majority of these borrowings and diverted them into investments
in which the brothers alone had an interest,for their personal gain, including,
but not limited to, the purchase of stock of Cooper Companies.
The Sturman brothers have since been convicted and sentenced in federal
court on bank fraud charges.
Finding
the Missing Money
Donna
filed a $20 million proof of claim in each of the above bankruptcy cases
known in the system as "debtor's estates," the basis of the
claim being that she is entitled to 25 percent of all assets that the
three debtors owned as of the time of the bankruptcy filings because pre-petition
her brothers stole her 25 percent interest in their father's and mothers'
assets.
Were
she to prevail, Donna would have a dollar-for-dollar claim and would be
entitled to interest on this money from the date the funds were received,
which (at the legal rate of 9 percent) would amount to $2.1 million. Thus,
were she to prevail on this element of her claim, Donna would be entitled
to approximately $6.9 million.
Additionally,
Donna asserts a claim to 20 percent of the gross receipts from the operations
of the 86th Street property, given that Donna did not approve the expenses,
and asserts a claim through the Muriel Sturman Estate.
The
Muriel Sturman Estate has a 20 percent interest in the 86th Street property
worth about $2.4 million, plus interest at 9 percent from July 7, 1998,
for a total of approximately $2.9 million.
Donna
asserts that she is entitled to the Muriel Estate's interest in the 86th
Street property and operating receipts relating to the property due to
the pre-petition diversion of assets by the debtors.
Finally,
Donna asserts that the debtors improperly made loans to themselves totaling
about $1.5 million from the Muriel Sturman Estate which have not been
repaid, of which Donna's 25 percent share would be $389,523.20. With interest
since 1985, Donna would be entitled to approximately $915,379.52.
In
short, Donna's claims total well over $10 million. To be paid this money
dollar-for dollar because her claims arise from Donna's ownership interest
in assets which were never property of the estate due to their having
been fraudulently diverted and appropriated by the debtors.
Bankruptcy
Court Run Around
As
early as December 10, 1996, the Bankruptcy Court Judge stated that the
amount of legal fees paid to date were so extraordinary as to call into
question the trustee's judgment in incurring legal expenses.
The
Judge noted that $2.9 million in fees had been paid and that $1.2 million
in fees remained to be paid,and remarked :So we are talking about churning
away here at eating up the entire estate".
"I
look at it now and I say to myself how in the world did we spend $2.6
million on legal fees before this?" the judge said. "What in
the world was going on? Why did we allow those legal fees? I thought the
bulk of that was somehow in connection with 86th Street and yet I can't
really immediately see what it is that was done during that period of
time or what you took over or what that benefited the estate."
Nine
years later, and millions of dollars more charged against the estate,
and it still remains unresolved in a case that was filed in 1989.
Copyright 2008 by WJFA. All rights reserved. This material on this web site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. See WJFA's Disclaimer and Privacy Policy. Contact the webmaster to report problems with the web site. |