L. Cas? 92- 1 Dnr? AQ'T?Filed Entered 0521?] 7/16 '14 Fleet: Transcript Of eposition Of Patrick McGahn Tari77 9'03 Entered 05.4mm 14:00:10 Desc 9 il 29 1903 Regarding [464-1] M. Page 1 of 4. 'meN-u?nna?moa-Womn .. rm 'r .Itq . .. . 5 5 I was; Hf?gi Din- IC-PR 2 9 1995' JR NEW JERSEY 1 ?1 5. - . .. MINUTES OF TELEPHONE Trump Plaza QDNFERENCE CALL EELQ Associates, APRIL 29. 1993 ON MOTION F0 RECONSIDER DENIAL OF HECTOR DAVIS FEE APPLICATION Debtor Bruce Zirinsky, Esq. PARTICIPANTS: Jennifer Stone, Es Joseph Jones, Esq. For the reasons advanc Hector 0 Davis is granted. An a1 Disbursements are allowed with de costs, secretarial overtime and $1.00 per page. Mr. Zirinsky will submi Dated: April 3-7 1993 Norman Rosebaum, sq. q. ed, the application of Steel, lowance of $105,000 is entered. duction for computer utilization elecopy charges in excess of a form of order. JODITH H. MUR 0.3. UPTCY COURT Copies mailed this 4% Bruce Zirinsky, Esq. Norman Rosenbaum, Esq. Jennifer Stone, Esq. Joseph Jones, Esq. ay of April 1993, to: ?We. DOC 497 Filed 04/29l93 Entered 05/17/16 140010 . Let er Bnef By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor Anthony J. Ritca' In Support'Of' PagDeeiscof 15 MAIRQNE. BIEL. FEINBERG. GRIFFITH s. STANGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORN EYS AT LAW MARK BIEL 3201 ATLANTIC AVENUE AFFILLATED WITH ATLANTIC GWFITH .. 0840' VINCENT 1.. LAMANNA. on. oopetns s. armore- A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION EDWIN A. PAQNE {699) 344""73 ATTORNEY AT LAW - . 4490 LANols AVENUE R. RAUH FAX NUMBER (see) 344-5942 no. some: - RICHARD A. SEAISLE CITY.N3 3555:? 08243 eoeem- v. umnon: (uses-I937) April 27 19 93 {60912533113 MARTIN 1.. oun- {lass-1968) mu: 263-2386 ALEXANDER n, ELATT (lees-reel) 53151-0?: HAeeca?-ncc c; y: . 9616 'ero AVENUE .11 - MEMBER EAR EDI eon. lemma oo?a: Mary Shashaty, Deputy Clerk c. an, United States Bankrutpcy Court -4 .3 15 North Seventh Street a: 2% Camden, New Jersey 08101 Trump.P1aza Associates, et a1, Debtor 3 Case No. 92-11188- JW Dear Ms. Shashaty: Please accept this letter brief in-lieu of a more formal brief in support of Anthony Ricca's Notice of Motion to file a late proof of claim. A creditor's claim can be barred for untimeliness under Bankruptcy Rule 3003 only upon a showing that it received reasonable notice of the bar date. ;p Re: Robintech, Inc., 863 2d-393 (CA 5 TEX 1989). The demands of due process require that reasonable notice be given which is ca lculated to reach all interested parties, which conveys all required information and permits a reasonable amount of time for a response. ?riqht v. Placid Oil Co. 107 BR 104 1989). Whether notice to a creditor is adequate depends upon the facts and circumstances of a given case. In Re: Rohintech. Inc., 863 2d 303 (CA 5 Tex 1989). Moreover, all known creditors must receive actual notice. Wright v. Placid oil Co., 107 BR 104 (ND TEX 1989); In Re: Charter co., 125 BR 650 (MD FLA 1991). A debtor may not rely upon mere publication in order to inform a kmown creditor of his rights and duties. Wright v. Placid Oil Co., 107 BR 104 (ND TEX 1989). The mere knowledge that a debtor has filed for bankrutpcy protection cannot- substitute for a creditor's receipt of actual notice of a bar date. In Re: ANNC. Inc., 109 BR 210 (BC ND TEX 1939). Three factors have been considered by courts in determining whether or not unique circumstances exist to find a basis upon which a late proof of claim may be allowed. Courts look to: The adequacy of the notice provided; (2) The source of the delay and sophistication of the creditor; and (3) Prejudice, if any, that will inure to the debtor should filing be allowed. In Re: Sharon Steel Corp1990) .Other jurisdictions have Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 497 Filed 04!29/93 Enter (1 5/17/Letter Brief By Richard A. Carluccl for Creditor Anthony J. Race? In Support 331? 1%agrgeZSEJf 15 MAIRONE. BIEL. ZLOTNICK. FEINBERG, GRIFFITH a A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION utilized a two factor test in determining whether excusable neglect is present to allow the filing of a late proof of claim. See in as: ?sy'm Enterprises, I_nc., 9.4 (BC DC VT 1988) (A court should not consider prejudice to -hapter ll debtor as factor in determining existence of excusable'neglect.) The most critical factor which a court should consider under either analysis in determining whether excusable neglect exists is whether the moving party had sufficient and reasonable notice of the bar date. In Re: Clear Corp1990). Moreover, courts have traditionally allowed a creditor to assert its claim in a bankruptcy proceeding notwithstanding the failure to timely file a proof of claim where a debtor was aware of the creditor's claim, but did not provide reasonable notice of the bar date to the creditor. Sharon Steel_gorp1990). In the matter at bar it is submitted that a two factor test be utilized by this court to determine whether or not exCusable neglect has occurred. This is due to the fact that the actual actions of both debtor and creditor are the only relevant factors which either party has actual control over. Excusable neglect should not be based upon factors beyond the independent control of either the debtor or the creditor. Accordingly, the analysis used by the court in In Re: STN Enterprises. Inc. should be utilized to determine whether or not excusable neglect exists in the matter at bar. An analysis of the applicable law and unique facts and circumstances of this case reveals that Anthony Ricca should be permitted to file a late proof of claim as his constitutional right to notice had not been complied with by the debtor. The intentional mailing of a notice by debtor to an address where Mr. Ricca had not lived for over three years as well as the numerous address changes Mr.- Ricca has undergone constitute adequate justification excusing-him from complying with the claims bar date announced by this court. This is due to the fact that Mr. Ricca was not aware that any such claims bar date existed. See Exhibit Certification of Anthony Ricca- 'Clearly the failure to timely file =a proof of claim was due to circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Mr. Ricca. Moreover, the source of delay is also directly attributable to the debtor as it was on actual notice of at least three of Mr. Ricca's address changes prior to its filing for bankruptcy. See Exhibit Affidavit of Jack Feinberg, Esquire. The use by debtor of an old address 'under such circumstances is sufficient justification in itself for this court to find that Mr. RiccaJs-due process rights of notice were not adequately protected. In addition, Mr. Ricca is not the sophisticated. corporate creditor' referred. to 'under the second factor of the court's analysis. He is a tort claimant who suffered' a personal injury. Moreover, it is respectfully submitted the debtor will not be prejudiced by the late filing of a proof of claim in this matter. Debtor has actively litigated this matter Case Doc 49? Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc Letter Brief By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support Of Page 3 of 15 MAIRONE, BIEL. ZLOTNICK. EINBERG, GRIFFITH a STANGER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION in State court has taken extensive discovery both before and after the debtor's filing for bankruptby and is ready to proceed to trial. Accordingly, it is respectfully submitted that this court should grant Mr. Ricca' motion tolfile a late proof of claim. Very truly yours, Richard A. Carlucci _Case Ledean 2-11188-JHW DOC 497 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14: 00: 10 Deer; By Richard A. Cariucci for Creditor Anthony J. Rioca in Support Of Page 4 of 15 HAIRONE, BIEL, ZLOTNICK, GRIFFITH STANGER, P.A. 3201 ATLANTIQ AVENUE ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 08401 (609) 344- -1173 Attorneys for Anthony J. Ric_ca STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT In Re: THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et al., CASE NO. 92-11188 JW Debtors. or COUNSEL 1 STATE on NEW JERSEY: i coonry or ATLANTIC :38. I Richard A. Carlucci ofgfull age, under oath, hereby deposes and says: . 1. I am an attorny a? law admitted to practice before the United States District Court of the District of New Jersey. 2. I hereby state that on the 28th day of April, 1993 I served a true copy of the ?otice of Motion with the supporting Certification of Anthony J4 Ricca, Affidavit of Jack Feinberg, Esquire and attached brief tpon the attorneys for the debtor by forwarding same by first claSS mail, postage prepaid, addressed as indicated on the service list annexed to the notice filed herewith and also to the United States Trustee. Case Lefter Br BWORN AND SUBSCRIBED TO BEFO HE THIS Z'Sth DAY 01" April, 1 mm H. mws? IUTARY PUBUC OF NEW JERSEY Hy Commission Expires Nov. 7. 1993 I 1 I 93. .92-11108-JHW Doc 49? Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 'Desc Ief By Richard A. Carlucc1 for Creditor Anthony .J. Ricca In Support Of Page 5 of 15 Richard A. Carlucci Case 92" Letier Brief 11108-JHW Doc 497 Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:00:10 Desc By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support Of Page 6 of 15 HAIRONE, BIEL, ZLOTHICK, GRIFFITH STANGER, Poll. 3201 ATLANTIC AVENUE ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 08401 (609) 344?1173 Attorneys for Anthony J. Ricca I UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT In Re: FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, CASE NO. 92?11188 JW et al., 1 Debtors. II II. AFFIDAVIT OF JACK FEINBERG, ESQUIRE STATE OF NEW JERSEY: COUNTY OF ATLANTIC :55. Jack Feinberg of full:age, upon his oath, according to law, deposes and saysattorney at law of the State of New Jersey and am a partner in the law firm of Mairone, Biel, Zlotnick, Feinberg, Griffith Stanger, P.A., attorneys for Anthony J. Ricca, the applicant for leave to file a late Proof of Claim and to be added to the claimant's list in the above entitled matter. 2. At no time did I receive a notice from the court or anyone else informing either myself or my client that Mr. Ricca was listed as a creditor of the Debtor. I also never received any notice from the court that Trump Plaza had filed for bankruptcy protection. 3. The only notice that I received from Russell Lichtenstein, Esquire, attorney for Trump Plaza Associates, was his notice to the Supreme Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Ocean County that the ?294 a Case Doc 497 Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc Letter Brief By Richard A. Carlucm for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support Of Page 7 of 15 . debtor filed for Chapter 11 thereby staying all actions against Trump Plaza; See Exhibit 4. It was my further inderstanding that this matter would be reinstated once Trump Plaz4 emerged from bankruptcy.. I received absolutely no notice that Proof of Claim was necessary to be filed in this matter in orier to preserve my client's claim upon the Plaza's emergence from bankruptcy. 5. On May 16, 1989 the day Mr. Ricca filed his Complaint against the Debtor, he listed his residence in the Complaint as 1117 Parkview Lane, Toms Riter, New Jersey. See Exhibit 6; When Mr. Ricca adswered the interrogatories propounded upon him by Debtor's attorney, Russell L. Lichtenstein, he listed his current address as 547 Shetland Avenue, Sewell, New Jersey. The answers were certified by Mr. Ricca on November 13, 1989. See Exhibit 7. During Mr. Ricca'a deposition of April 30, 1990 taken by Debtor?s attorney, Russell?L. Lichtenstein, Mr. Ricca stated his address as 12039 Alta Carmel Court, Apt. 145, San Diego, california 92128. See Exhibit 8. Debtor was on actual notice that the Beechwood address was no longer the residence of Mr. Ricca. However, for unknown reasons Debtor's attorney intentionally provided Claudia King Associates the incorrect address of 223 Mermaid Avenue, Beachwood, New Jersey for service of notice despite having actual knowledge that Mr. Ricca had not lived there for almost three (3) years. 9. Mr. Ricca's Certification states that he did not receive; the notice to file a proof of claim which was mailed to 223 Mermaid . 2-11188-JHW Doc 49? Filed 04129193 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc By Richard A. Carluccr for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support Of Page 8 of 15 Case 9: Letter Brie Avenue, Beechwood, New Jersey by Claudia King 5: Associates in March of 1992'. I I 10. Mr. Lichtenstein'is intentional failure to provide a correct address for service: of the notice must be viewed by this so by Mr. Ricca court as a sufficient basisi for th Sworn and subscribed to befo - me this 23 th day of April;r 1993 . H. HILUS ROTARY OF NEW JERSEY Hy Commission Expim How. 7, 1993 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 49? Filed 04/29/90?rger60005/1me 14:00:10 o'?sc Letier Brief By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor Anth owl emcee J. Ricca In Support Of Page 9 of 15 COOPER PERSKIE APRIL WAGENHEIM (it LEVENSON A PROFESSIQHAL ASSOCIATION 112: A AVENUE JAMES ATLANTIC CITY. JERSEY 034.01 4391 RONA 7- LEWIS 3. (Con?ict: Civil Trial Attorney} [Certi?ed Civil Attorney] ARTHUR LOUIS meoawm rELacoPI - Isa-313440939 In rmuant (Certified cm: niu Anon-lay} ABBIE a. RONALD A. VINCENT .I. anunor- In Taxation] . 155.5 ZION I wesr tart-25mm AVENUE MICHAELR. UTKE LLOYD 0- uonmnem. NJ 03225-1533 i VOORHEES. NJ cacao 9- {Certified Criminll rum Attorney] - moms F. MICHAEL Jaceasom 1? WILUJM .1. FRANK A. pang TELECCPIEH (809] 383-1375 TELECOPIEH (609] 795-5641 LAURA KENNEFH D. MARY c. CHARLES A. usnsom" CHRISTINE M. cont ALAN I. Deuce" on In av WE moms u. warm-- BARRY DELCHEH GERARD w. Dumum DHaIsroPHsn anvuuson STANLEY u. 032W KATHLEEN meme RUSSELL L. . (5091 ran-1212 soorr FL ROEEHT E. SALAD TELECOPIEH [ma] 522.25? JANET GRAVITZ In Tultjunl DAVID s. wassum STEVEN D. SCH Brazen" aromao massacr- IL AHLETTE Lowe. ma." PAUL TENDLEFI DENISE susm KRISHNA 5- EHIC A. JOHN F. ?nun uses. Ina (IF COUNSEL - TM EMANUEL L. LEVIN. Pu?. 18, 1992 "Jinn ugungn'pu Inltl-llEH GA. EAR HEHHED uwaeuce M. PEHSKIE Atlantic City Jack Feinberg, Esq. Mairone Biel Law Firm 3201 Atlantic Avenue Atlantic City, New Jersey 03401 Re: Ricca v. Trump Plaza Dear Mr. Feinberg: I am enclosing a copy of a Notice 0 i File Automatic Stay along with a transmittal letter with which I forwarded the Notice to the C. art for ?ling. Please note that pursuant to 11 USE. 362(a)(1) 91 589. all "judicial, administrative or orher action or proceeding" against Trump Plaza is stayed. This Staywould also effect all discovery, motion practice, and any and all other activity related to this litigation. 23% .Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 497 Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/16 14. 00:10 D'esc Letter Brief By Richard A. .grlucci for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Sup on Of Page 10 of 15 COOPER RSKIE APRIL NIEDELMAN WAGENHEI LEVENSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Jack Feinberg, Esq. March 18, 1992 i Page 2 This stay will remain in e?ect untilITrump Plaza emerges from their Chapter 11 Bankruptcy ?ling. RLL: (109641) cc: Patricia M. Wild, Esq. Narkiewicz, Risk Manag'e?r Doo497 Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/1 116 14:00:10 Desc etter Brie FILE 20561 A Professional Corporation I 250 Washington Street P. O. Box 787 (201) 349-2443 Attorneys for Plaintiff By Richard A. for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In upport Of Page 11 of 15 RECEIVED 8: FILED mm! 18 1981] M. DEAN HAINES DEPUTY CLERK SUPERIOR ct. OCEAN co LOMELL, MUCCIFORI, ADLER, RA ASCHIERE, AMERILE PEHLIVANIAN Toms River, New Jersey 08754 Plaintiff(s) ANTHONY J. RICCA vs. Defendant(s) TRUMP PLAZA SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION OCEAN COUNTY CIVIL ACTION JURY DEMAND organized and existing unde: State of New Jersey, with its the Boardwalk at Mississippi Complaint against defendant(sL The plaintiff(sL Anthony J.Riccav Parkview Lane, Toms River, Ocean County, New Jersey by way or say(s): FIRST COUNT 1. Defendant, Tr?mp Plaza is a corporation, duly the laws and regulations of the main place of business located at Avenue, Atlantic City, New Jersey. 9 5 DOCKET NO. I ,Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 497 Filed 04729193 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 De'sc Letter Brier By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support Of Page 12 of 15 Stateb your full name. age, date and place ofibirth. social security number and driver's license num er. ANSWER: Anthony JOhn Ricca, age 30, date 0 birth 11/13/58, in Newark, 142?52?6317; NJ DC R4062?0537l-116 2 i a State your place of residence at the time? of tlie incident and now. ANSWER: At time of accident, 223 Mermaid Ayenue, Beechwood, NJ 08722; address now 547 Shetland Avenue, S?well, NJ a) Stage tile names and addresses of the persons with whom you resided at the time of the Inc: an . . 1 b) State the names and addresses of the persons with whom you reside now. ANSWER: a. Self D. My spouse, Sharon Ricca. State your marital status at the time of the accident and presently. ANSWER: At time of accident, single; I am now married. lf married. state when. where. and by whom tli'e ceremony was performed and the name and address of your spouse. ANSWER: June 17, 1989 at Tavistoc:k, NJ in a religious ceremon. 1 EM, I. 5/17/16 14:00:10 Desc - - Doc 49? Filed 04/29/93 Entered 0 13 of 15 Carlucci for Creditor Anthony J. RIcca In Support Of Page 'I_certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true, I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are wilfully false, I am subject to punishment for cont~mpt of Court. DATED: 11/13 [89 seasoning? 1 STATE OF SS COUNTY OF doing duly sworn according to law, upon his oath-deposes and sayscorporation (Title) (Nine of Corporation) I of the State of tie in the above entitled_action, and amithe agent-of the corporation for the purposes of answering the interrogatories Served upon the attorneys for said corporation in this. action by the and for making this certification. 2. have read the said inte uogatories and the foregOing answers hereto are true in every detail to my best knowledge, information and belief. (signature of corporate officer) Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of 198 (Affix Seal)? Notary Public of I paSe 92-11188-JHW Doc 49? . . Filed 04/29/93 Entered 05/17/16 14' qetter Brief 3y Richarg A. Carluccl for Creditor Anthony J. Ricca In Support 8?.1gagge?cof 1 SUPERIOR count or new JERSEY LAW DIVISION ocean COUNTY 2 1 Docket No. 3 I 4: ANTHONY J. RICCA, Plaintiff; CIVIL ACTION 0 UI I. at o. DEPOSITION 6 TESTIMONY OF: - TRUMP PLAZA, ANTHONY J. RICCA 7 Defen?ant. 8 9 TAKEN LISA ZIRILLI, a Certified Shorthand Reporte? and Notary Public of the 10 State of New Jersey, License New x101671, at the law offices of coopen. 11 WAGENHEIM a Levzusou, P.A.g_Suite 320, 1125 Atlantic Avenue, Atlantic City. NewEJersey 03401; on Friday, 12 April 20, 1990 commencing at 2:16 p.FEINBERG Gareexre, P.A. BY: PHILIP G. 16 3201 Atlantic Avenue 1 Atlantic City, New Jer%ey 03401 17 For.the Plaintiff. 13 COOPER, PERSKIE, NIEDELHAN. WAGENHEIM LEVER 0N: P.A. 19 BY: RUSSELD L. ESQUIRE Suite 320 20 . 1125 Atlantic Awenue - - .Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401 21 For the Defendant. 22 23 . ATLASTIC CITY COURT REPORTING SEPVICS 24 Certified Sharthan? Reporters P.O. 303 K, NCRTEFIELD, JERSEY 03225 25 (509) 546-0025 212% ?anW-u?n?W . cath nod your head or say um-hum or uh~huh because 10*- i . Ease 9-2-11IEBJFIW Doc 49.! 04:29:95 EnteredIO?STilTil?; Dem. etter Briefs By Richard A. Carlucci for Creditor'Anthony J. Rlcca In Support Of Page 15 of 15 5 Anthony J. Ricca today. so the answers must be verbal responses. You that informatibh doesfnot translate on the stenographic machine end will not be included in the 1 transcript. . .Do yougunderstand that? A .Yes. Do_you understand a transcript will be made of this proceeding which will contain the answers to -the questions I ask add that transcript may be available for me to ude at the trial and also for your attorney? A Yes. Where do yo?ipresently live? A San Diego. dalifornia. The-address? A 12039 Alta Carmel Court, Apartment 145. That's San Diego. California 92128. And how long have you lived at that address? A I have lived there since January 28th. 0 Of this year? A That's correct. 0 Who do you live there with? A My wife. Sharon. 1 When were yoL married? -ATLAHTIC REPORTING a: . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 506 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Motion By McGahn Friss and Miller To Compel Production Of Documents Pursuant To Page 1 of 3 DEAN C. WALDT, ESQUIRE (DW8367) DAVIS, REBERKENNY P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road 9 P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?5000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92-11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) . Hearing Date: NOTICE OF MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION QF DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the day of May, 1993, at or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, the undersigned, as counsel for McGahn, Friss a Miller ("McGahn"), will move before the Honorable Judith H. Wizmur, United States Bankruptcy Judge, at the United States Courthouse, 15 North 7th Street, Camden, New Jersey, for an Order compelling the firm of Clapp Eisenberg, P.C., to produce certain documents pursuant to a subpoena served upOn such firm on April 8, 1993, and for an order compelling the 99/7/7?f7g Clapp a Eisenbt attached herett 77in 4iy?ab? grand? (Si A5241 (L. 73C: 2% 573/73 1? Vii/19?? urn-2.3: clearaw/I?? m: 2:74 4/21,? . <2 drew-?w; we 8,0 (g Case 927111887JHW Doc 506 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Motion By McGahn Fries and Miller To Compel Production Of Documents Pursuant To Page 2 of 3 In support of its motion, McGahn will rely upon the attached Certification of Counsel, the Memdrandum of Law filed in support hereof, and oral argument of coun4el. ORAL ARGUMENT IS REQUESTED. QAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller Dean CT Waldt DATED: April 29, 1993 1698R.1 - .. -. Case D_oc 506 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Motion By McGahn and Miller To Compel Production Of Documents Pursuant To Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATION or SERVICE I, DEAN C. WALDT, Esquire, hereby certify that I can gage true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Motion to Com e1 Production of Documents Pursuant to Subpoena, the Certification in support thereof and the proposed of Order related thereto to be served upon the following persons by telecopy transmission and by depositing the same in Federal Express overnight delivery this 29th day of April, 1993, addressed as follows: I: Stephen C. Greene, Esquire Schwartz, Tobia a Stanziale Kips Castle 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, NJ 07042 Salvatore T. Alfano, Esquire Clapp Eisenberg 1 Newark Center Newark, NJ 07102 DEAN C. WALDT DATED: April 29, 1993 1698R.10 I Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 507. Filed 0480/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc ,Certrficatlon In Support Of [506?1] Motion To Compel Production Of rouments Pu Page 1 of 21 I DAVIS, ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road - P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for MoGahn, Friss a Mil er DEAN o. WAme, ESQUIRE (owa367) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: . Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et al, 92?11190 (JW) .Debtors. Hearing Date: CERTIFICATIQN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL WW I, DEAN C. Esquire, a member of the firm of Davis, Reberkenny Abramowitz, counsel for McGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn") in the above?referenced Chapter 11 case, hereby certify as follows: 1. On or about March 9, 1992 (the "Petition Date"), Trump PlaZa Associates, et a1. (collectively the "Debtor"), initiated this chapter 11 case by filing a petition for relief in the United States Bankrupt0y Court for the District?of New Jersey (the "Bankruptcy Court"). 2. The Debtor's Plan of Reorganization was confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court in this case on April 30, 1992. 3. On or about June 25, 1992, the Debtor filed an omnibus Motion seeking to disallow, reduce, or expunge certain claims (the "Motion"). Among the elaims which Debtor sought to reduce and/or SOY. expunge was the claim of MCGahn, Friss Miller. . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 50?. Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certification In Support 01? [506-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 2 of 21 4. McGahn's claim is based upon fees and expenses incurred on behalf of the Debtor by the McGahn law firm in providing legal services to the Debtor prior to the Petition Date. The majority of such outstanding fees and expenses were incurred by the McGahn firm during the course of the so?called "Penthouse Litigation" involving Trump Plaza Associates, Donald Tramp, individually, and other parties relating to the Debtor's purchase of a partially developed hotel/casino property in Atlantic City, New Jersey. 5. The Penthouse Litigation was ongoing for several years, and a trial was conducted in 1992. The Honorable Anthony Gibson, Judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County, issued a decision in the Penthouse Litigation on March 25, 1993. Accordingly, absent an appeal, the litigation is concluded. 6. Pursuant to its Motion, Debtor characterizes the McGahn claim as a so?called ?Category Claim," which indicates a claim which diverges from the amounts indicated on Debtor's books and records or as to which there is no adequate documentation. 7. On July 30, 1992, McGahn filed an objection to Debtor's Motion and demanded that Debtor demonstrate that McGahn's claim is invalid. 8. On February 17, 1993, a hearing was commenced with respect continue on May 18, 1993. The Ba kruptcy Court has authorized the to the Motion and McGahn's objection thereto. Such hearing is to parties to continue discovery during the interim period. 9. In supplemental responses to Interrogatories prepounded by McGahn, the Debtor has alleged the McGahn claim is diSputed "on -21 . . Case 92-111887JHW Doc 507. Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Deso Certification In Of [506-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 3 of 21 the grounds that the legal services were unnecessary and the fees grossly inflated in proportion to the actual and reasonable responsibilities delegated to or otherwise assumed by [McGahn] in the Penthouse Litigation." Debtor's response further states that: As a result of the identity of interest, Clapp Eisenberg served as 'lead counsel' and for virtually all purposes conducted the defense of both Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associates. In effect. the direction, management and execution of Trump PlazalAssociates' defense was handled by Clapp Eisenberg, even though McGahn, Fries a Miller was counsel?of?record and purported to perform the defense for Trump Plaza Associates. Debtor's supplemental response goes on to accuse the McGahn firm of "padding" and "churning" the file through various means. Debtor's supplemental response also alleges that "all of the foregoing [work billed by McGahn] lacked any independent rationale. nor was it requested or utilized by Clapp ?isenberg to jointly advance the interests of Mr. Trump and Trump ?laza Associates." A true and correct copy of the Debtor's supplemental response is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit 10. During his Opening remarks at the hearing on February 17, 1993, Stephen Greene, Esquire. counsel for the Debtor. Specifically stated that Clapp a Eisenberg carried the bulk of the defense in the Penthouse Litigation and did virtually all of the legal work connected with such case. Furthermore, Mr. Greene has indicated that Salvatore Alfano. a partner in the Clapp Eisenberg firm with substantial responsibility for such firm's work in the'Penthouse Litigation, would be called to tedtify on behalf of the Debtor about the relative contribution of the McGahn firm as opposed to the work performed by the Clapp Eisenberg firm. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 50? . Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certification In Support Of [506?1] Motion To Compel Production Oquocuments Pu Page 4 of 21 11. On April 8, 1993, Edward N. Fitzpatrick, Esquire, managing partner of the Clapp Eisenberg firm, was served with a subpoena, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit The subpoena demands the I production of certain documents, including, into; olio: Any and all time sheets and/or time records, including but not limited.to attorneys' billings, secretarial billings, costs, paralegal billings, etc., from January 1, 1988, through and including October 31, 1991, which pertain or in any way relate to the Sands/Penthouse/ Trump Litigation, including but not limited to the zoning hearings before the Atlantic City Zoning Board; (2) the prerogative writ litigation before the Honorable L. Anthony Gibson, and/or (3) any and all matters related to litigation under Docket No. as originally captioned, Boardwalk Proper iesv In Penthouse Internationol, BPHC A i In EP rkin together with any and all related appellate filings and federal court litigation. (collectively the "Time Records"). 12. The subpoena required production of such documents by April 15, 1993. Subsequently, the undersigned counsel for McGahn agreed that the documents may be produced on or before April 22, 1993. 13. On April 15, 1993, the undersigned counsel for McGahn received a letter from Stephen Greene, Esquire, counsel for the Debtor, expressing an objection to the production of the Time 'Records by Clapp Eisenberg on th% grounds that such documents are privileged and not subject to discrvery. A true and correct copy of Mr. Greene's letter dated April 15 1993, is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference aL Exhibit 14. By letter dated April 16?31993? a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit undersigned counsel for McGahn responded to Mr. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 507 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certification In Support Of [506-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 5 of 21 Greene's April 15 letter. Such correspondence indicated McGahn's position that the broad claim of attorney?client privilege contained in the April 15 letter did not comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. The correspondence further indicates that any objections other than privilege must be asserted by Clapp Eisenberg, the entity to which the subpoena is directed. 15. On April 19, 1993, the undersigned counsel for McGahn received a letter from Salvatore T. Alfano, Esquire, a member of the firm of Clapp a Eisenberg, in response to the subpoena, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit Mr. Alfano's letter indicates that the firm of Clapp Eisenberg is constrained to invoke the attorney?client privilege. It is assumed that such constraint exists because Clapp Eisenberg has been instructed by the Debtor to withhold the production of the Time Records based on the claim of privilege asserted by Mr. Greene in his April 15 letter. 16. Neither Debtor nor the firm of Clapp Eisenberg have provided McGahn with any further objections to the production of the Time Records in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 17. On April 29, 1993. the undersigned consulted with Stephen Greene.r Esquire by telephone regarding this matter. Mr. Greene indicated that Debtor had not yet egun the review of the Time Records with respect to the issue privilege. However, regardless of the privilege issue, Mr. Greene indicated that Debtor would i continue to object to the production of the Time Records by Clapp Eisenberg based upon its assertioniof lack of relevance. In light . . Case Doc 507_ Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certification In Support Of [506-1] Motion To Compel Production of Documents Pu Page 6 of 21 I of Debtor's position, the undersign+d_informed Mr. Greene that the instant Motion would be filed with The Bankruptcy Court. l8. McGahn agrees that the firm of Clapp Eisenberg is constrained to withhold the Time Records so long as the Dethr instructs such firm to do so based on a claim of attorney?client privilege or otherwise, absent an order from this Court compelling their production. 19. Accordingly, McGahn has filed its Motion To Compel Production of Documents Pursuant to Subpoena to request the Bankruptcy Court to compel Clapp Eisenberg to produce the Time- Records inasmuch as the assertion of attorney?client privilege is inadequate under the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, as well as without factual or legal basis. 20. McGahn respectfully requests the Court to enter an Order compelling the Debtor to permit Clapp Eisenberg to release the Time Records to MoGahn pursuant to the terms of the subpoena. Absent compliance with such Order, MoGahn requests the Debtor be deemed to be in contempt of this Court. Respectfully submitted, DAVI REBERKENNY St. ABRAMOWITZ . . Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller Law lDean C. Waldt DATED: April 29, 1993 1698R.3 . Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 507' Filed 04/30/93 Entered 95/17/16 14:20:02 DBSC Certification In [530.611] Moltonimlm?npel Production Of Documents Pu Page 7 of 21 LAW OFFI ES meson: A. SCHWARTZ, TOBIA (Sr, STANZIALE ROBERT s. moan?"- Jan? A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ?3?9?35' -T 1r MARTIN a. FIHESTONE KENT A. F. WEISERT RIP was LE cu" SEL 22 CHESTMONT ROAD BEN H. BECKER i may 5. ROSENSWEIG - CLAIR. RSEY 07042 muow a. serum-- MONT NE FE TRENTON OFFICE JOSEPH u. '72 W- STREET sravsn smosn (201)746-0000 no. no: 2cm FRANK a. FAX TRENTON. NJ 03607 comm J. cascca 5??,th (201 I 746- :849 I509: 393-004! GEORGE (2011746-6250 PM JENNIFER D. {809} 393-1990 WILLIAM A. amen. STEPHEN c. GREENE ALSO cm. am" ALso 0.0. ALSO Fu amu- 1 November 3 0 19 9 2 ALSO rm. MD. I VIA TELECOPY FIRST CLASS MAIL: (609) 482?8414 - Arthur J. Abramowitz, Esq. DAVIS, REBERKENNY, ABRAMOWITZ 499 Cooper Landing Road P.O. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08002 Re: Trump Plaza Associates Dear Mr. Abramowitz:- 'Please accept this letter in lieu of a certified supplementary response by the Debtor ?e Respondent?s First Set of Interrogatories. A formal supp4ementary response, duly certified, will be served on you shortly. This letter shall supplement the Debtor's October 1, 1992 responses to Respondent's Inte?rogatories, the Debtor's September 21, 1992 response to Responde?t's Request for Documents and the Debtor's September 16, 1992 Reply to Respondent's Request for Admissions. This letter contains information currently known to the Debtor and. 'may' be fu'ther supplemented as discovery continues. In addition, is letter containing Debtor's supplementary response incorpo ates all (MS the Debtor's previous objections to ReSpondent's Inte rogatories, Request for Documents, and Request for Admissions. inally, this letter is subject to and may be amended by the con inuation of Debtor's inspection of Respondent?s documents, which 9 began on November 19, 1992 and adjourned by consent until nother date mutually agreed by counsel. We request that do ument inspection at Respondent's office continue on Wednesday, Dicember 2, 1992 at 10:00 a.m. 5% ii Case Doc 50? Filed 04/3 /93 Entered (95/17/16 14: 20 2 Dose Certi?cation In Support Of [506-] Motion To Corngel Production Qf Documents PD Page 8 of 21 SUPPLEMENTARY RESPONSE or DEBTOR TO FIRST SET OF 1. To the extent that Respondent?s Amended Proof of Claim (the "Claim") in the amount of $793, 215. 22 includes a charge of $10, 000. 00 representing a retainer fee for March, 1991 the same is-diSputed en the grounds that Debtor terminated payment of a retainer in the sum of $10,000.00 effective March 1, 1991 by notice to ReSpondent prior thereto from Nicholas L. Ribis. See also letter dated ApIril 19, 1991 from Patricia M. Wild to Patrick T. McGahn, a copy of which has been furnished 'previouSly. -This supplements Debtor's answers to interrOgatories 10, 11, .12, 19, 17, 18, and 19." 2. To othe extent the fClaim includes a charge: of $774,314.25 representing fees fer legal services rendered between April October'al, P991 under Respondent?s file number 5845?0375 captioned "Trump EPI v. -BPHC (Sands Hollywood)" (hereinafter referred to as "Pinthouse -litigation"), the same is disputed on the grounds that tr legal services were unnecessary and the fees grossly inflated'in proportion to the actual and reasonable responsibilities delegated to cns- otherwise assumed by ReSpondent in the Penthouse litigat ion. By way of background and in further support of the Debtor objection, the Penthoui litigation was initiated by the filing of a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic IiCounty by Plaintiffs Boardwalk Properties, Inc. and Penthousei International, Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as nthouse") on or about MarCh 20, 1989.= Defendants Acquisi ion, .Inc. and BPHC Parking Corp. (collectively referred to as "Sands") filed their answer, counterclaim and third-party cemplaint against Denald Trump and Trump Plaza Associates, among others, on or about. April 3.: 1989. The case revolved around the Penthouse casino site in Atlantic City. In .August 1987, Penthouse. as seller' and. Sands as buyer entered into a 40 million dolla' written contract of sale for that site. This contract provided for an outside closing date of December 15,1988 with time eing of the essence. Penthouse unilaterally extended the outsi time of the essence closing date to February 1,1?989. No clos i'g ocurred on that date either and Penthouse subsequently sold the property to Donald Trump onI March 18, 1989 for 35 million dollars. 'The third?party complaint a leges that Trump .and/or Trump Plaza Associates engaged in he following activities: civil conspiraCy, Violations of New Jersey Anti-trust Act, i . _Cas_e Doc 50?. Filed 04/30/93 Entered (95/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certification In Support Of [:506-1] Motion To Compel ProductionKOf Documents Pu Page 9 of 21 violations of the New Jersey RICO Statute, malicious interference with contractual relations,; malicious interference with prospective economic advantage,, inducement to breach a fiduciary duty and malicious abuse of probess. The relief sought included, among other things, compensatory damages, punitive damages, treble damages, injunctive relifef, the revocation of all of Mr. Trump's- and Trump Plaza .Associates' casino licenses, the revocation of Trump Plaza Astociates' current Certificate of Partnership, the revocation of any other licenses or permits issued to Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associates by the State of New Jersey, and a declaration voiding the conveyance by Penthouse to Mr. Trump of Penthouse?s interest in the Penthouse site. At all material times throughout the Penthouse litigation, the law firm of Clapp Eisenberg was counsel to Mr. Trump, and the law firm of McGann, Friss 5: Miller was counsel to Trump Plaza Associates. Notwithstanding the appearance of separate counsel, a uniform defense was asserted on behalf.? of Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associates. As a result of the identity of interests, Clapp Eisenberg served as "lead counsel" and for virtually all purposes conducted the defensefof both Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associates. Thus, Clapp isenberg drafted all pleadings, motions, discovery, appellate wlrk, conducted all depositions, and argued all motions, interlocutory appeals and pretrial conferences. In effect, the rection, management and execution of Trump Plaza Associates? _efense was handled by Clapp Eisenberg, even though McGahn? Friss Miller was counsel of record and purported to perform the defense for Trump Plaza Associates. In ?the initial fewr months of the Penthouse litigation, McGahn, Friss and; Miller was involved in factual investigation, extensive docume production, and conferring with Clapp Eisenberg in order to glar up and establish the defense of the litigation. Thereafter, the role of McGahn, Friss and Miller became secondary and the nece sity of its involvement greatly diminished. Despite the absenc; of a genuine litigation purpose, McGahn, Friss and Miller perfo ed patently unnecessary work which in no way contributed substantially to the ongoing defense. This "padding" and "churning" of thegfile included among other things: overdeployment of attorneys to the matter; nonproductive make?work such as legal research, outlining and digesting depositions, motions and briefs; outlining uestions fOr depositons; reviewing pleadings and documents; sparing for and appearing at depositions and pretrial confe ences with two more attorneys, none of whom cross?examined dtponents or made meaningful oral arguments. Even routine phone onferences were handled by two or more attorneys without any genu'ne purpose. All of the foregoing lacked any independent rational nor was it requested or utilized by Clapp and Eisenberg to joi tly advance the interests of Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associatls. The extent of overstaffing by McGahn, Friss and Miller was lf?evident even to Patrick McGahn who wrote to Donald Trump on ugust 6, 1990? that his firm has I .. Case 92- 11188- JHW Doc 507 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 02 Desc Certification In Support Of [506- Motion To Compel Production (Of Documents Pu Page 10 of 21 substantially reduCed use of personnel as well as work performed and that further reductions we 1d and should continue. Despite this admission, McGahn, Friss miller continued to perform tasks that yielded no benefit to Trump Plaza Associates, and is therefore noncompensable, or ha so little. utility that its value was disproportionately Small cbmpared t'o the expense charged. Accordingly, Debtor contends thiat all charges fer the following serViCes between April, 1990 through October 1991 are noncompensable: Solomon Forman for 1075.05 hours), Catherine A. Tuohy 387: 50 -Ifor 469. 25 hours), Kelly Campbell 475. 00 for 316. 5 hours), darl It. Tripician for 215 5 hours), Solomon Friss 332. 50 for 175. 55 hours), George K. Miller for 34 ho rs), William T. Miller 187 50 for 21.25 hours), Dennis M. T'ohy for 15.25 hours), an unidentified law clerk for 156r5 hours), an unidentified law clerk 62. 50 for 37. 25 hours), an unidentified law clerk 225. 00 for 24. 50 hours), 'an unidentified law clerk 250. 00 for 45 hours), an unidentified law clerk 437. .Eo? for 28. 75 hours) and a'n uni dentified law clerk ($400. 00 or 8 hours). In addition, Debtor ,submits that the charges for services rendered. 'by .Patrick McGahn ($248, 687.- 50 for -.994 75 hours) ahd James E. Isman ($303 45.7 50 for 2, 043. 05 hours) are grossly exaggerated and duplicative and require substantial reduction. The foregoing analysis is a1so applicable to legal fees paid by the Debtor for services Irendered. prior to April 1990. Accordingly, Debtor reserves the right to institute an adversary proceeding against Respondent for the purpose of dingrging and/or obtaining credit based on excessive and unreasonable fees paid. 5 Very truly yours, SCHWARTZ, TOBIA a. STANZIALE A. Professional As oc'ation 13E Imn c. y: SCG:cmd . Case Doc 50? Filed 04I30193 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc COST CENTERS OF Hg 8 MILLER BY CLERK AERIL 1990 - OCTOBER 1991 . (:Certh?eation In Supporth Motion To Compel Productionpf Documents Pu Page 11 of 21 ATTORNEY (1959) JEI (1972) SFO (1937) CAT (1985) KC (1988) (1989) SFR (1937) CKM (1978) WTM (1989) DMT (1985) we DG CB HG CLASS SR. PARTNER RARTNER OF COUNSEL ASSOCIATE ASSOCIATE PARTNER. ASSOCIATE ASSOCIATE CLERK CLERK CLERK CLERK CLERK CLERK $250.00 $150.00 $150-00 $150.00 $150.00 . $150.00 8150100 $150.00 $150.00 8150E00 50E. 00' 5@.oo $?50.00 50- 00 50.00L 9 school 2043.05 1075.05 469.25 316.5 215.5 175.55 34 21.25 15.25 156.5 37.25 24.50 45 8.00 28.75 FEES .248,687.50 306,457.50 161,257.50 70,387.50 47,475.00 32,325.00 26,332.50 5,100.00 3,187.50 2,287.50 7,825.00 1,862.50 1,225.00 2,250.00 400.00 '1 437.50 918,497.50 -- . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 50? Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certifioation In Support Of [506-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 12 of 21 . 0TH: Patrick T. McGahn JEI: James E. Isman SFO: Solomon Ferman CAT: Catherine A. Tuohy Kc: Kelly Campbell CNTE carl N. Tripician SFR: Solomon Fries GKM: George K. Miller I WTM: William T. Miller DMT: Dennis M. Tuohy WC: DG: GB: CB HG: Hugh Gallagher RT: . Case DOC 507 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14' 20: 02 Base Certification In Support Of [506- 1] Motion To Compel Production 01? Documents Pu II. I. tut-JII Sum-mm In. a Cur, ununr Inc than??Frame" We United States Bankruptcy Court ink}: the.Matter of: . TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1. Debtor To: Edward N. Fitzpatrick, Esq. CLAPP EISENBERG, P.C. Qne Newark Center Newark, NJ 07102 DISTRICT OF Page 13 of 21 NEW JERSEY SUBPOENA 1N A CASE THE BANKRUPTCY CODE 92- -11133/Jw Case No. 92- a Chapter 1ll- YOUARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States Bankruptcy court at the place. date. and time specified below to testify in the above case. United States Bankruptcy Court 15 N. 7th Street' Camden, NJ 08102 *And any and all postponements and contjinuancea thereof. counraoou No . 2 DATE AND TIHE . - Tuesday May 18,1993 10: 00 atom?" YOU ARE COMMANDEO to appear at the place. date. ahd time specified below to te's?tl?; at the taking at adeposition in the above case. FLA-CE DATE AND [31 YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit lnspedtion and copying of the following documents or objects at the piece. date and time specified below (list documents or odiects): annexed hereto. The documents referred to in Exhibit PLACE 499 Cooper Landing Road Cherry Hill, NJ 08002' Davie, Reberkenny 6: Abramowitz, P.a.m. DATE AND Thursday, April 15, 1993 YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following premises at the date and time specified beiow. PREMISES DATE AND Any subpoenaed organization not a party to this prosper agents. or other persons who consent to testify on its Di on which the person will testify. Fed. 30ibii6) made phalf. and may set forth, for each person designated. the matters applicable to this proceeding by Rule 7030. Fed.R.Bankr.Ff. See Rules'10-18 and 9014 Fed. R. . issuwo ISSUING oar-ween 5 mus sooness mo PNONE Dean U. .118 1d 1: C, UAIE April 8, 1993- 6 Esq. 499 Cooper Landing Rd. P.0. Box 5459, inn case shall designate one or more officers. directors. or manag- Engio?edcozi/soroa?? Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 oe'sb 0 ompel Production Of(Documents Pu Page 14 of 21 rtifioation in Support Of [5 i SERVED UP.) PROOF DATE PLIKCE 26 Ill/? W33 EHVICE Hal/Mt Cl.? AV SERVED ON Edam/c1 or sent-1c: I ermu?/ SERV t=.o ev mus) Qger. Writer rams, 06 Mr" DECLARATION 0 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws oi the Uni iained in the Prool oi Service is true' and correct. Exec uled [?rst ms DATE SERVER ted States of Rmerica that the foregoing information con- ?aw/w - srcm?rune oFsaevEn 4?55 Fania-.3 RC1 appears on senveh Cine MT 080091 Rule 4.5. Fed.Ft.Clv.P.. Parts ltd) made appli to) PROTECTION OF PERSONSSUBJECT T0 SUBPOENAS. ol asubpoena shall take reasonable steps den or expense on a person subject behail ol which the subpoena was lssu impose upon the partyo sanction. which may Include. but Is not limited to. a reasonable attorney?s lee. copying oi designated books. papers. orinspectlon oi premises need not appear section or inspection Unless corn (1) A party oran attorney responsible tor the issuance and service to avoid Imposing undue bur- to that subpoena. The court on . ed shall enioroe this duty and ch oi this duty an appropriate i lost earnings and . - rettomeyin brea reduce and permit Inspection and documents or tangible things. In persOn at the place oi pro- mended to appear iordepoeitlon. hear- A person commanded to ing or trial. to produce and permit Inspection and on service at the subpoena or beiore the time ior compliance it such time is less than 14 days aiter?senrlce. attomoy designated In the subpoena written objection to Inspection oi any or ii oblectlon is made. titled to inspect and copy pursuant to an ordero ii oblectlon has been made. notice to the person comman order to compel the production. Such an order to compel production shall protect any person who is not a party oran cl 3 parterom sign Commended. shall quash or the subpoena ii It to) Subject to paragraph term or this rule. a person commanded pyine may. within 14 days alter -. serve upon the party or all at the designated materials orol the premises. the party serving the subpoena shall not be en- the materials or Inspect the premises except i the court by which the subpoena was Issued. the party serving the subpoena may. upon. dad to produce. move at any time ior an Ilicant expense resulting Irom the Inspection and copying On timely motion. the court by which a subpoena was issued llrne ior not a party or an an we miles irorn ihu oncd or regularly transects Iztiir. to allow reasonable til) a person who Is a party to irrm-l in a place more in write?: that person resides. is emp produce them as they Erganlze and label them to cones emand. that it is nr In a rials. the slain: shall he rrurrtn expressly anti the nature hi the tittrtus pro lest the Claim. cable in casus under the bankruptcy Code by Fiule sore. FedRBanltu?. business In person. except that. sublecI?jo the provisions ol clause (emamli) of this rule. such a person may in order to attend trial he commanded to travel irorn any such place within the state in which the trial ls held. or requires disclosure ol privileged or other protected mat- ter and no exception or waiver applies. or subjects a person to undue burden. ii a subpoena requires disclosure oi a trade secret or other con?dential research. development. or commercial Iniom'tation. or ill} requires disclosure at an unrotalned expert's opinion or in- lormation not describing specliic events oroccurrences In dispute and resulting lrom the expert's study made not at the request oi MY Palm or requires a person who is not a party oran spam: to Incursubsiantlal expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial. the court may. to protect a person subiect to or ailected by the subpoena. quash or modify the subpoena or," the partyin whose behail the subpoena is Issued shows a substantial need lorthe tes- timony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hard- ship and assures that the person to whom the subpoena is ad- dressed will be reasonabiy compensated. the court may order ap- pearanca or production only upon specllied conditions. id) DUTIES iN HESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. pending to a subpoena to produc: documents shall are kept In the usual course oi business or shall pond. with the categories In the A person res a subpoena is withheld on a claim 5 Irirri preparation mala- ltlliill he supported try ..I (2) When inlomtaiion subicci i duo-cu ?till I: lo urnriritr Iitn party In nun- I . ?Case 92-11188-JHW 099507 Filed 04/30)93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc In Support Of [50611] Motion To Compel Production Of Q'ocuments Pu Page 15 of 21 EXHIBIT Any and all time sheets_and/or time records, including but not ?limited to attorneys' billings,i secretarial billings, costs, paralegal billings, etc., from.gJanuary 1, 1988, through and including October 31, 1991, whichipertain or in any way relate to the Sands/Penthouse/Trump litigatitn, including but not limited to, the zoning hearings before thejAtlantic City Zoning Board; (2) the prerogative writ litigation +efore The Honorable L. Anthony Gibson, J.S.C., and/or (3) any; and all matters related to litigation _under. Docket No. Ail-o?000051-39E, as originally captioned Boardwalk Properties, Inb., and Penthouse International, Ltd., v. BPHC Acquisition, Inc.I ind BPHC Parking Cogp., together I with any and all related appell?jate .filings and federal court litigation. You are also to produce any and all deposition transcripts of testimony from Donald J. Trump, which refer to his taping of a phone call from Willia?nWeidner on or about December 7, 1988, as well as any and all transcripts of the trial testimony of Donald J. Trump pertaining to the same telephone call and taping thereof, as well as any and all documents, notes, or other written material pertaining to the-same telephone call and taping thereof. i . - . Case 92- 11188 -JHW Doc 50? Filed Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 02 Desc Certification In Support Of [506- 1] Motion To Compei Production Of Documents Pu Page 16 of 21 HECEIUL- A I: .1 -H 30I993 LAW OFFICES meonone A. SCHWARTZ. TOBIA (Eb STAN ZIALE ROBERT 5. ?um? A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 5- ?"905- RONALD L. KIP's CA TLE MARTIN B. FIRESTONE KENT A. F. 5 . COUNEEL mam?? 9- 22 ROAD BEN N. BECKER 6' RDSENSWEIG MONTCLAIR. JERSEY 07042 TRENTON ormcz DAMON R. I JOSEPH u. OANPISANO - '72 w' 57" STEVEN SINGER (2013748-60IPO Po. Box 2041 FRANK R. FAX TRENTON. NJ 03607 DONALD J. OREOCA . teas: 393-0041 T. AYRES (20' 746 58419 GEORGE L. {20' 74565.50 JENNIFER o. {6091 393-1990 A. STEPHEN c. GREENE uAn'rIN L. ALSO SAL ALSO no. BAR-- m5- ALSO FLA ROGER C. WARD ALSO le. EAR nu ALSO MD. ALSO PA April 15, 1993 TELECOPY (609) 667-7434 and FIRST CLASS MAIL Dean Waldt, Esq. . Davis, Reberkenny Abramowitz 499 Cooper Landing Road Box 5459 Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08002' RE: Trump Plaza Associates v. McGahn, Friss Miller Dear Dean: This confirms our telephone Conversation of yesterday in which you consented to my request. to postpone the subpoena for production of documents by Clapp Eisenberg returnable April 15, 1993 at your offices. This wil constitute our limited Objection to the subpoena under Bankruptcy Rule 9016. Initially, I wish to confirm that you agreed to withdraw that part of the subpoena seeking any and all deposition transcripts of testimony from Donald J. Trump which refer to his taping of a phone call from William Weidner on or about December 7, 1988. You advised me that Mr. McGahn in fact has a copy of the transcript in his files. Secondly, I indicated that copies of the transcripts Of the trial testimony of Mr. Trump which pertain to the same telephone call_would be made available to you as a courtesy even though the same are public documents otherwise available from the Superior Court's stenographers. I do not know at this time whether there #4 c, -. _Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 507_ Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certificatlon In Support Of [506-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 17 of 21 Page ?2 exists any "documents, notes or other written material pertaining to the same telephone call and taping thereof", other than the deposition transcript of the t'pe expert, Mr. Ginsberg. I will pursue this inquiry further an, advise you of the results of the search. The objection to the subp ena for "any and all time sheets and/or time records" and 'attorneys' billings, secretarial billings, costs, paralegal bil ings, etc.", from January 1, 1988 through October 31, 1991 rests in several grounds. To the extent the time irecords and/or billings reflect attorney/client communications! between Clapp Eisenberg and Donald J. Trump or Trump PlazaiAssociates, or the work-product of Clapp Eisenberg, such docume?ts are privileged and not subject to discovery by you. I will Ebegin this review immediately and advise you to what extent the privilege will be invoked. The request for the time f-records and billings is obviously overbroad, unduly burdensome an- not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. I would estimate that the records are voluminous. Their production on only seven days notice and at your offices in Cherry Hill,'rather than at Clapp Eisenberg's office, is clearly; improper. Moreover, the subject matter of this claim litigation is confined to the necessity and reasonableness of Mr. McGahn'sifees for the period between April, 1990 and October, 1991. Clapp Eisenberg?s time records and bills are not relevant to that issue. Certainly any documents that precede the aforementionedltime frame are also not relevant. You claim that you are entitled to review evidence supporting our argument that Clapp Eisenberg, but not McGahn's firm, performed the legal work in theiPenthouse case. In that regard, I suggest that your subpoena is m"sdirected and should be focused on the pleadings in the case, st of which are already in Mr. McGahn?s possession. Your issuance of the subpoena for clearly irrelevant documents raises serious. questions concerning a violation of'Rule 9016(e). I ge you to contact me to discuss an' amicable resolution before you involve the Court. Very truly yours, SC ARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE A rof s' 1 Association By: STEPHEN I . .Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 50?. Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Certificatlon In Support Of [506-1] Motlon To Compel Production Of Documents Pu Page 18 of 21 WILLIAM D. HDQAN EDWARD k. KONDRACKI ARTHUR d. ABRAMOWITZ KENNETH D. ROTH IRA G. MEGDAL WILLIAM D. LAVERY. JR. DAVID R. OBERLANDER RAYMOND G. CONSOLE HARRY A, HQRWITZ DEAN C. WALDT HOWARD 5. HENDELSON KEITH WALDHAN ROBERT I). MALLDY TERRI JANE FREEDHAN- (. LAW OFFICES DAVIS, REBERKENNY 8c A CORPORATION 499 COOPER LANDING ROAD 130:: no. 5459 FM, CHIEREY HILL, NJJ. 03002 ssv-oqoo April 16, OF COUNSEL WILLIAM C. DAVIS WILLIAM IJPKIN 1993 CLARENCE P. REBERKENNY DAVID M. BRENT THOMAS P. OF PA BAR ONLY VIA TELCOPY and FIRST CLASS MAIL Stephen C. Greene, Esquire SCHWARTZ, TQBIA STANZIALE Kip's Castle 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, NJ 07042 Re: In re Trump Plaza Associates/Motion To Expunge Claim of McGahn,-Friss Miller Dear Steve: Thank you for your letter of april 15, 1993. We will agreed to extend the time within which Clapp Eisenberg must respond to the subpoena serve upon Mr. Fitzpatrick as managing partner on April 8, 1993 until April 22, 1993. Initially, it would be helpfu? if you would clarify the role which your firm is taking in this matter. Previously, when we requested Clapp Eisenberg's time records from the Debtor, you indicated in return correspondence that we should seek those records directly from Clapp Eisenberg. We have now done so pursuant to subpoena. Based on the fact that yours is the only objection we received, I will assume unless corrected that Clapp Eisenberg has.no objection to responding to the subpoena but that the Debtor is instructing Clapp Eisenberg?t0 withhold the requested documents as a matter of attorney-client privilege. A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. Fitzpatrick, and I will assume I have correctly stated Clapp Eisenberg's position in this matter unless I receive correspondence to the contrary. ?36 A I . .- :Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 507 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:20:02 Desc . Certification In Support Of Motion To Compel Production Of chuments-Pu Page 19 of 21 DAV-IS, 8c With respect to trial testimony related to the taped telephone call, I assume that your indicatipn that transcripts of trial testimony will be provided as a cburtesy, at our cost of course, is an offer being made byithe Debtor. Your courtesy in that matter is appreciated. With respect to the objectiops summarized in your letter to the production of time sheets nd related billing documentation, objections based on relevancy, un ue burden and overbreath are not properly asserted by the ebtor, since the subpoena is not directed to the Debtor. I see no basis for the Debtor asserting these objections on beh?lf of Clapp Eisenberg. With respect to the assertion of attorney/client privilege, I would draw your attention to Fe?eral Rule of Civil Procedure 45, which requires a claim of privilege to be made expressely and to be supported by a description of the nature of the documents or things not producted that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim. Accordingly, your April 15 letter constitutes an imadequate response to the subpoena. We will expect compliance with the subpoena by Clapp Eisenberg on April 22, 1993 absent express and specific written objections in compliance pith Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. To reiterate, I wquld expect any objections raised by the Debtor to be limited to the attorney/client privilege issue, since the Debton has no standing to raise objections to a subpoena directed to a third party on other grounds. In addition, I believejit will be up to Clapp Eisenberg to determine whether the production of documents at our offices rather than in Newark is unduly burdensome. I look forward to receiving?your formal response in this matter and, thereafter, will respond accordingly. Sincerely, BRAMOWITZ, P.C. CW Dean C. Waldt REBERKENNY Bye cc: Patrick T. McGahn, Esq. Edward N. Fitzpatrick, Esq. i i . . . Case Doc 50? Filed 04/30i93 Entered 14:20:02 Desc Certification In SUppor ?Of [500-1] Motion To Compei Production Of. ocuments Pu Page 20 of 21 CLAPP 8c - mm? 221993 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION c. ?959-1996! pmuw M. Knuacn FINOLD K. MYTIILKA nIcHAno A. COUNSELLORS AT LAW a'rUAn'r L. RAND: c359: unnuzssv 23"? . A LLBEN . A ONE NEWARK CENTER chAno N. vmccu'r r. PAPALIA NEWARK 07102 ?g?a??LiA?E'lvcun LoncLL atria CLARK unwnl: a. Minn ARK r. KLuan (201) 642 3900 (212) 571 0240 Pm?? RONA . Ams we a o. a "on FAX- (20? 54737413 MELVYN H. BEROBTEIN rats .J. OODDWIN-I- r. ALFAND MAoch: JEFFREY Ma ECHWAEEZ . REBEL . ATLANTIC CITY OFFICE MARK FALK BHTAN w. noncnt A. MAnmco HAnsLIcr-t Lwt'rAM 26 SO. AVE. JOHN L. couovca noutnr J. BCACHAH JOHN M. DONNELLY JOANM x. DOBFIANSKY ATLANTIC CITY. NJ. 0540: never: P. ADAM N. JOHN A. AVERY nonsm- w. antenna? (509, 347.7330 DANIEL J. YOUNG JIJ AGNES I. RYMEH :chno w. FAX: (609) Mir-261: MICHAEL. w. ZELENW M.A. source 1 A. PENN ROBERT J. nounncnacn OF COUNSEL JEROMI: C. CIBENBEHO DOROTHY 0. BLACK E. FISCHLER PAUL S. WENTHER HOWARD RDBEN OF NJ. BAR ONLY IEOIJ i DIRECT DIAL DIRECT FAIR 6903 823?121 i April 19.11993 VIA TELECOPY Dean C. Waldt, Esq. Davis, Reberkenny Abramowitz 499 Cooper Landing Road Box 5459 Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08002 In re Trump Plaza Associates' Motion to Expunge Claim of McGahn, Friss Miller Dear Mr. Waldt: Mr. Fitzpatrick is away oh vacation until May 3. I will therefore respond to the statements;directed to Clapp Eisenberg in your April 16 letter to Stephen C. Greene. 1. I have asked a paralegal to photocopy the trial testimony of William Weidner, Donald'Trump, Roberto Rivera Soto, Jack Pratt and Paul Ginsberg relati to the December 7 call. The same holds true for the deposition estimony of Paul Ginsberg and the handwritten notes of William We'dner allegedly reflecting his December 7 call with Donald J. Trum . These will be mailed to you this week. 2. With respect to the emainder of your request, we object to its breadth. Moreover, to the extent it calls for production of privileged informatio we are constrained to invoke the attorney client privilege. We herefore cannot provide these documents on April 22. I . . .Cajse 92-111887JHW Doc 507_ Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc In Support Of [5061-1] Motion To Compel Production Of Pocuments Pu Page 21 of 21 Dean C. Waldt, Esq. April 19, 1993 Page 2 I suggest that you, Mr. Greene and I speak this week. If we can resolve these objections, we!will copy whatever documents we agree to produce and mail them to you. Very trul? yours, Salvatore T. Alfano STA/rmg cc: Stephen C. Greene, Esq. (VIA TELECOPY) Patrick T. McGahn, Jr., Esq. (VIA TELECOPY) 83737 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION - -- Case 92-11188-JHW DOG 508 Filed'04/3Q/93 Entered, 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506?1] Page 1 of 15- v? DAVIS. ABRAMOWITZ. P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller DEAN C. WALDT. ESQUIRE (DW8367) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 Debtors. Hearing Date: MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA McGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn") by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this Memorandum of Law in support 0f its Motion to Compel Production of Documents Pursuant to Subpoena (the "Motion") filed before the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District-of New Jersey (the "Bankruptcy Court") on April 29, 1993. I. BACKGROUND The facts set forth in the Certification In Support Of Motion To Compel Production Of Documents PuLsuant to Subpoena filed with this Memorandum of Law is incorporated herein by reference. By way of summary, Debtor has alleged in responses to Interrogatories and through its cdunsel at the initial hearing in this matter on February 17, 1993 that it is not obligated to pay the McGahn firm with respect to its invoices for professional services 8/0 0 - Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 2 of 15 rendered on behalf of Trump Plaza Associates in the so?called Penthouse Litigation based on accusations that the McGahn firm "churned" the file in that case. The basis of this allegations is Debtor's contention that the firm of Clapp a Eisenberg acted as "lead counsel" in virtually all matters related to the Penthouse Litigation and that the McGahn firm was simply counsel?of-record for Trump Plaza Associates. Because of the role of the Clapp Eisenberg firm, the Debtor's position is that the work performed by the McGahn firm "lacked any independent rationale" and was not? "requested or utilized by Clapp Eisenberg to jointly advance the interests of Mr. Trump and Trump Plaza Associates". .Furthermore, counsel for the Debtor has indicated that Salvatore Alfano, a partner in the Clapp Eisenberg firm with substantial responsibility for such firm's work in the Penthouse Litigation, will be called to testify on behalf of the Debtor about the relative contribution of the McGahn firm to the Penthouse Litigation as measured against the work performed by the Clapp a Eisenberg firm. As a result of these allegations, the McGahn firm caused a subpoena to be issued to Clapp Eisenberg on April 8, 1993 demanding the production of time sheets and/0r time records from January 1, 1988 through and including October 31, 1991 which pertain to the so?called Penthouse Litigation (the "Time Records"). This time period coincides with the involvement of the McGahn firm in such litigation. . 5 In response to this subpoena,fClapp a Eisenberg has informed McGahn that it is constrained to +ithhold such documentation because the Debtor has asserted that all such material is subject to the (Jase 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt?for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 3 of 15 attorney/client privilege and, ?urthermore, is not discoverable based on lack of relevance. Neither the Debtor nor Clapp Eisenberg have provided McGahn with any further objections to the production of the Time Records. McGahn concedes that so long as the Debtor instructs Clapp a Eisenberg to withhold the Time Records as a matter of attorney/client privilege or otherwise, it is constrained to honor Debtor's request. absent an order from this Court compelling production. II. SUMMARE QF ARGUMENT The McGahn firm respectfully submits that the assertion of attorney?client?privilege by the Debtor with respect to the Time Records is without basis. First, Debtor and Clapp Eisenberg have completely failed to comply with the clear requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d)(2) which requires specificity when - failing to respond to a subpoena.hased on a claim of privilege. Second, it is submitted that the Time Records at issue are not privileged documents at all, in that they contain general factual material related to the types of services rendered, the amount of time spent and the charges incurred rather than substantial matters of attorney/client communications. Third, it is submitted that the attorney/client privilege has been waived by the Debtor. The p-ivilege.has been waived due to the ?act that the McGahn firm is alre dy fully aware of all matters which occurred in the Penthouse Litigation during the period to which Time Records refer. The Medahn firm was fully aware of all matters related to the representation of Mr. Trump-and Trump Plaza Associates in the Penthouse Litigation, including planning of trial strategy; which go well beyond an? information which might be . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 4 of 15 contained in the requested Time Records. Furthermore, by asserting that Debtor is not liable to pay the McGahn firm for fees and expenses incurred on its behalf due to the fact that all substantive work in the Penthouse Litigation was performed by the Clapp Eisenberg firm,'Debtor has raised the issue of a comparison of the work performed by each firm during the course of the Penthouse Litigation and has effectively waived its right to use the attorney/client privilege as a shield to prevent McGahn from asserting and preparing a defense against such an allegation. Fourth, there can be no prejudice to the Debtor through the production of the requested Time Records due to the intimate involvement of the McGahn firm in the representation of Trump and Trump Plaza Associates in the Penthouse Litigation during the relevant time period. In other words, there is nothing new of substance that will be learned by the McGahn firm through the production of the requested Time Records. Since McGahn represented Trump Plaza Associates during the relevant time period, the information in the Time Records and additional information already known to McGahn is protected from revelation to third parties by the attorney/client privilege. There is no rational basis for asserting the privilege since the Time Recogds will be revealed to Mr, Trump's and Debtor's own former counsel, who is already familiar with any substantive information contained therein and is under an existing duty to maintain confidentiality under the applicable Rules of Professional Conduct. Furthermore, it is noted that the so?called Penthouse Litigation has been condluded and the record in the case has been closed. Therefore, Debtor may not argue any prejudice to on?going litigation. i Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 14:20:02 DBSC Memorandum By Dean C. Wald: for M'cGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 5 of 15 Finally. the Debtor's assertion that the Time Records are not relevant and its instruction to Clapp a Eisenberg to withhold discovery thereof on that basis is completely specious. Debtor itself raised the issue of Clapp a Eisenberg's role in the Penthouse Litigation. To argue that Time Records which reflect that role are irrelevant borders on the incredible. LEGAL ARQUMENT A. DEBTOR HAS INSTRUCTED CLAPP EISENBERG T0 WITHHOLD THE TIME RECORDS WHILE IGNORING THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 45. Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004(0) provides that the production of documentary evidence may be compelled in the manner provided in Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9016. Rule 9016 incorporates by reference Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d)(2) provides as follows: When the information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation materials. the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents. commun?cations, or things not produced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim. The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey has held that the mere assertion df privilege, without a more complete description, does not prohide the Court with sufficient information to determine whether t-e standards have been met. Wei v. Bodner, 127 F.R.D. 91, 96 (D.N. . 1989). See also, Kelghner v, International Playtex. Inc., 116 469 (M.D. Pa. 1987); United States v. Exxon Corp., 87 F.R.D. 6&4 (D.D.C. 1980). A complete I I I I I description in compliance With Rule 45 is also required for a party in -5- Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:20:02 DBSC Memorandum By Dean C. Wald; for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 6 of 15 seeking discovery to have a full and fair opportunity to oppose the assertion of privilege. Wei 1, Bgdner, guppa, at 96. The court in Wei v, Bodner held that: At a minimum, for each document asserted to be protected by these privileges, the defendants must provide both plaintiff and the Court with the date of the document, the name of its author, the name of its recipient, the names of the people given copies of the document, the subject of the document and the privilege or privileges asserted. 127 F.R.D. at 96.. In the present case, Debtor has simply stated that the Time Records requested are being withheld on a claim of attorney/client privilege without further explanation. Particularly under the circumstances of this case, where the party requesting the Time Records was co?counsel with Clapp a Eisenberg in the same litigation to which the Time Records refer, a full explanation of the basis upon which privilege is asserted is required. Under the circumstances, it is difficult to imagine what attorney/client communications would be revealed to the McGahn firm of which it is not already aware. Furthermore, there is no basis upon which the Court or the McGahn firm can determine what is in the Time Records beyond a general desoription of services performed and the time and fees allocated to such services. In light of the Debtor's complete failure to comply with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, it is respectfully submitted that its claim.of privilege is both procedurally and substantively inappropriate and need not be recognized by the Court. Certainly, Debtor should not be permitted to delay these proceedings or prohibit the McGahn firm from -5- Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 7 of 15 developing a defense to the assertions which provide the basis for its objections to the McGahn claim through a bald and unsupported assertion of attorney/client priv'lege in complete disregard for the requirements of Rule 45. i THE TIME RECORDS REQUESTED BY MCGAHN ARE NOT PRIVILEGED IN NATURE. In Clarke v, Amerigan Commerce National Bank, 974 F.2d 127 (9th Cir. 1992), the court considered the issue of whether attorney' billing Statements were subject td a claim of attorney/client privilege. In upholding the decision of the lower court to permit discovery of such records, the court stated as follows: We have examined the attorney billing statements ordered disclosed by thegdistrict court. We conclude that they do not contain privileged communications between attorney and client. The statements contain information on the identity of the client, the case name for which payment was made. the amount of the fee, and the general nature of the services performed. Our previous decisions have held that this type of information ?is not privileged. find nothing in the statements that reveals research or litigation strategy which would be entitled to protection from disclosure. 974 F.2d at 130. Absent any articulation by the Debtor that the information contained in the requested Time Records reveals privileged material of which the McGahn firm is not aiready aware, based on its involvement in the case as co?cou sel and its participation in all aSpects of discoVery, planning, ial strategy and related matters with respect-to the Penthouse Litugation during the relevant time period, the material requested oflClapp a Eisenberg pursuant to the subpoena does not fall within the?realm of attorney/client privilege.- Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean 0. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 8 of 15 C. DEBTOR HAS WAIVED ITS RIGHT TO ASSERT THE PRIVILEGE WITH RESPECT TO THE IIME RECORDS. I It is axiomatic that Debtor cannot assert the attorney/client privilege as a basis for withholding information which Debtor has already made known to the McGahn ?irm. The testimony of the witnesses to be offered by the McQahn firm at the evidentiary hearing in this matter will be toEthe effect that partners and associates at the McGahn firm wereEinvolved with the entire spectrum of activities related to the representation of Donald Trump and Trump Plaza Associates in the Penthouse Litigation. Debtor has made much of the fact that most of the pleadings in the case were prepared over the signature of C1a%p a Eisenberg and filed by Clapp Eisenberg, Testimony will.be prbsented at the hearing to the effect that the McGahn firm prepared the initial Answer and Affirmative Defenses on behalf of Donald Trump and.Trump Plaza Associates in the Penthouse Litigation; attended virtually all? non-expert depositions during the course of the litigation during the relevant time period; and met or conversed on a virtual daily basis with Mr. Trump and his advisors, experts, partners and associates at Clapp a Eisenberg, Trump.employees and other in?house personnel, and others to discuss factual background, trial preparation, trial strategy and alp,other matters related to the Penthouse Litigation during the time period for which Time Records are demanded. Accordingly, the Debtor has already intimately involved its former counsel in the matters reflected in the Time Records with a degree of depth and detail which render superfluous the type of information one would expect to find in the time and billing records I Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 9 of 15 of Clapp Eisenberg. Accordingly, since the information sought to be protected by the attorney/client privilege is already within the knowledge of the McGahn firm, there is absolutely no basis upon which the attorney/client privilege can be asserted and Debtor's right to make such assertion should be deemed waived. Furthermore, Debtor has waived the right to assert the attorney/client privilege with respect to the Clapp Eisenberg Time Records by grounding its argument that the claim of the McGahn firm for fees and expenses related to the Penthouse Litigation does not constitute a valid obligation of the Debtor on the assertion that the McGahn firm "churned" the file by billing for services which were actually being performed by the Clapp a Eisenberg firm. Indeed, Debtor's counsel has already indicated on numerous occasions that it intends to call Mr. Alfano, a partner with the Clapp Eisenberg firm substantially involved with the Penthouse Litigation, to indicate that the Clapp a Eisenberg firm was lead counsel in the case, as compared to the McGahn firm's role as merely local counsel without substantial litigation responsibility. It is Debtor that has raised the comparison of the work performed by Clapp a Eisenberg and the work performed by the McGahn firm as a basis for its objection to the McGahn claim for =rofessional fees. By making such assertion, Debtor has waived its to claim the attorney/client privilege. In Aqresta v. Goode, 1993 W.L. 40306 (E.D. Pa. 1993), the court considered the issue of whether a iitigant may introduce a defense factually based on an attorney/client exchange and then refuse to allow discovery about such exchange through a claim of privilege. In Agrest the plaintiff sued officials of the City of Philadelphia Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 10 of 15 for various civil rights violations. As a defense, city officials asserted that they had acted in good faith in the belief that their actions were lawful on advice of counsel. When plaintiff sought discovery of correspondence between the City Solicitor's office and the various defendants, the defendants objected on the basis of attorney/client privilege. The comrt held that: The attorney/client privilege may be waived, however, if the client asserts a Claim that in fairness requires examination of protected communications. . .insofar as these communications may fall ithin the attorney/client privilege, I conclude that defendants, by asserting a good faith immunity defense and thus puttingithe protected information into issue, Have waived their right to assert the attorney/client privilege. 1993 W.L. 40306 See also, 94 F.R.D. 246 (D.C.C. 1901); v. Rhay, ea F.R.D. 574 (E.D. Wash. 1975). Similarly, in United States v. Bilzerian, 926 F.2d 1285 (2d Cir. 1991), cert; den; 112 63 (1991), the court held that a defendant arguing a lack of intent to violate securities laws based upon conversations with counsel could not then protect himself from cross?examination on communications with his attorney on this subject. The court held that "the attornev/client privilege cannot be used as a shield and a sword." (emphasis added). The court stated that: I A defendant may not use t-e privilege to prejudice his opponent's ase or disclose some selected communications self?serving purposes. Thus, the priv'lege may implicitly be waived when defendant ass a claim that in fairness requires the axe ination of protected communications. -10- Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 0480/93 Entered 05/17l16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 11 of 15 952 s;2a at 1292. The court held that the defendant's defense that he thought his actions were legal based on conversations with counsel put in issue the basis for his understanding of what the law was with respect to his activities: Accordingly, the court held that the defendant's "conversations with counsel regarding the legality of his schemes would haveibeen directly relevant in determining the extent of his knowiedge and, as a result. his intent. . he asserted his good faith. the jury would be entitled to know the basis of his understanding that his actions were legal." As"in the Bilzerian case. Debtor seeks to use the attorney/client privilege as both a sword and a shield. Defendant asserts that the Clapp Eisenberg firm performed the actual work of legal representation of Trump and Trump Plaza Associates in the Penthouse Litigation and that the McGahn firm virtually manufactured invoices for unnecessary tasks. The Debtor has asserted that it will call as a witness a partner from Clapp Eisenberg who had' substantial responsibility for the Penthouse Litigation to inform the Court as to the respective rolls played by the Clapp a Eisenherg firm and the McGahn firm. Obviously, the McGahn firm is entitled to challenge this assertion and to cross?examine Mr. Alfano on this issue. While having no hesitation about using detailed information about work performed by the Clapp a Eisenberg firm during the course of the Penthouse Litigation as a s+ord to attack the validity of the McGahn claim for professional fees} the Debtor also seeks to use the attorney/client privilege as a shield to protect the Clapp Eisenberg Time Records which refle such work. Thus, Debtor wishes to reveal information regarding th work performed by Clapp -11- Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506?1] Page 12 of 15 Eisenberg when it is to its advantage and simultaneously seeks to protect such information from discovery which may aid McGahn in the preparation of its defense. Clearly, as a matter of law and as a matter of basic fairness. Debtor cannot have it both ways. By putting the work performed by Clapp Eisenberg at issue and by calling Mr. Alfano to testify on the very subject as to which McGahn now seeks discovery, Debtor has waived its right to assert the attorney/client privilege as to the Time Records. D. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PREJUDICE TO THE DEBTOR OR NO DILUTION OF THE PRIVILEGE BASED ON THE PRODUCTION OF THE REQUESTED TIME . RECORDS. . On the basis of attorney/client privilege, the Debtor objects to revealing to the McGahn firm the Time Records of its co?counsel in the Penthouse Litigation during a period of time when both the Clapp a Eisenberg firm and the McGahn firm were intimately involved with that litigation. It is submitted that Debtor cannot assert in good faith that the production of the Clapp &5Eisenberg Time ?ecords will reveal any information not already known to the McGahn firm. Pursuant to the Rules of Professional Conduct, the mcGahn firm has a duty to protect information relating to the representation of a former client. RPC Accordingly, production of the Time Records will not expand the universe of persons aware of information contained-therein which may conceiVably be subject to the attorney/client privilege. It has been alleged by the Debtor that a comparison of the work performed by Clapp Eisenberg and by the McGahn firm will reveal the McGahn firm's invoices reflect fees for work that was either not performed or not requested by the Debtor. The only means the McGahn firm has to combat such assertion is to -12- Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:92 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Friss and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 13 of 15 obtain the Time Records of the Clapp Eisenberg firm to determine whether there is any basis for Debtor's allegations. There is no source to obtain this information other than-the invoices, billing records and time records produced by the Clapp Eisenberg firm during the relevant time period. Accordingly, there is no deprecation or dilution of the attorney/client privilege involved in the production of the requested Time Records. However, there is extreme prejudice and irreparable harm to the McGahn firm in the preparation of its defense if the Debtor is permitted to hide behind the shield of the attorney/client privilege while simultaneously using selected portiOns of the all ged privileged material to build its own case. It should also be noted that the records in question deal with litigation which has been concluded and in which the record has been closed. Accordingly, the Time Records to be produced.do not relate to ongoing litigation, but are purely historic in nature. E. THE CLAPP EISENBERG TIME RECORD ARE IRRELEVANT IS WITHOUT BASIS. After raising the issue of the respective roles played by the Clapp Eisenberg firm and the McGahn firm in the Penthouse Litigation, Debtor now insructs Clapp Eisenberg to withhold production of its Time Records related to that litigation as undiscoverable based on lack of relevancy. It is inconceivable that Debtor can make this argument in gcod faith. Mr. Alfano is to be Debtor's witness, yet documents related to the anticipated subject matter of his testimony is claimed to be irrelevant. Such an c13_ Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Of [506-1] Page 14 of 15 argument is legally groundless. logically.inconsistent and patently absurd. IV. CONQLUSION For the reasons set forth hereinabove, McGahn, Friss Miller respectfully submits that Debtor has prohibited Clapp Eisenberg from producing the requested Time Records pursuant to the subpoena without justification, based on a groundless assertion of attorney/client privilege and lack of relevance in complete disregard for the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that this Court order the Clapp Eisenberg firm to produce the requested Time Records in accordance with the terms of the subpoena and prohibit the Debtor from further instructing Clapp Eisenberg to withhold their production. Respectfully submitted, ABRAMOWITZ, P.C, Attorneys McGahn, Friss Miller By: Dean C. Waldt Dated: April 29, 1993 1699R.1 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 508 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 02 Desc Memorandum By Dean C. Waldt for McGahn Friss and Miller In Support Of [506- 1] Page 15 of 15 CERTIFICATION or SERVICE I, Dean C. Waldt: Esquire, herehy certify that I caused a true and correct COPY Of the foregoing Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Motion To Compel Production Qf Documents Pursuant To Subpoena to be served upon the following persons by telecopy transmission and by depositing the same in Federal Express, overnight delivery this 29th day of April, 1993, addressed as follows: Stephen Esquire Schwartz, T_bia Stanziale Kip's Castl 22 Crestmonf Road Montclair, 07042 Salvatore Alfano, Esquire Clapp Eislnberg 1 Newark Center Newark, NJ DEAN C. WALDT DATED: April 29, 1993 1699R.14 7/16 14:20:02 Desc - 1188-JHW Doc 509 Flleql (34/30/93 Entered 95/1 Friss and Miller To Expedite Hearing Re. [506-1] Motion Page 1 of 3 DEAN c. WALDT, ESQUIRE (DW8357) DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, p.c. Z??gz? 499 Cooper Landing Road . P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for MCGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92?11138 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) I Debtors. Hearing Date: APPLICATION FOR SHORTENING TIME FOR NOTICE UNDER FED. R. BANKR. P. 9006(C)(l) The application of McGahn, Friss a Miller, by its undersigned counsel, respectfully represents as follows: 1. Your applicant is a respondent to a Motion filed by the Debtor in the above~referenced chapter 11 case seeking to expunge your applicant's claim for professional fees and expenses incurred for the benefit of the Debtor prior to the filing of its Chapter 11 case.. 2. A hearing on this matter has commenced on February 17, 1993, and is scheduled to continue on May 18, 1993. The Court has allowed discovery to continue during the interim period. 3. On April 8, 1993, a subpoena was served on the firm of Clapp a Eisenberg to produce certain documents, including, in er alia, such firm's time and billing records related to the so?called- Penthouse bitigation. 3?0 7. Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 509 Filed 04/30/93 Entere 05/17/1 1412002 Application By McGahn Fries and Miller To Expedite Hearing 12%: Pagsecz of 3 4. Clapp a Eisenberg has informed your applicant that it is constrained to withhold the production of such documents based on Debtor's claim that such documents are subject to the attorney?client privilege. 5. Debtor's counsel has informed your applicant that. regardless of the privilege issuef Debtor will object to the production of such documents by Clapp Eisenberg based on lack of relevance. 6. Your applicant has filed the attached Motion To Compel Production of Documents Pursuant to Subpoena. It is imperative that a hearing be held with respect to such Motion as soon as Possible to allow adequate time for the documents to be reviewed in preparation for a continued hearing on May 18. 1993. A hearing date of May 7. 1993 is requested. 6. Reduction of the time period in question is not prohibited under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(c)(1) and the rules listed therein. WHEREFORE, your applicant requests entry of the Order submitted herewith. Respectfully submitted, REBERKENNY P.C. Attorneys for McGahn. Friss Miller i ?ca/ Dean C. Waldt DATED: April 29, 1993 1698R.13 I . . Us. page 92-11188-JHW Doc 509 Filed 04/30/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Dear: Application By McGahn Fries and Miller To Expedite Hearing Re: [506-1] Motion Page 3 of 3 QERIIFIQATIQN OE I, DEAN C. WALDT: E$guire, hereby certify that I caused a true and cerrect COPY of the foregoing Application For Order Shortening Time For_Notice Under Fed. R. Bankr] P. 9006(c)(l) and Order Shortening Time Period For Notice A?d Setting Of Hearing to be served upon the following persons by telecopy transmission and by depositing the same in Federal Expr ss overnight delivery this 29th day of April, 1993, addressed as fo lows: DATED: 1698R.l7 April 29, Stephen C. Green Esquire Schwartz, Tobia Stanziale Kips Castle 22 Crestmont Road Montelair, NJ Q7p42 Salvatore T. Alfeno, Esquire Clapp Eisenberg 1 Newark Center: Newark, NJ 07102 BEAN c; WALDT 1993 BS Case 92-11180-JHW Dog 490 Filec105/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [485-1] Motion For Page 1 of 11 SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE A Professional Association 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, New Jersey 07042 (201) 746?6000 Co?counsel for Debtors By: JENNIFER D. STONE (ans?1309) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In re: CASE NOS. 92?11188 JW 92?11189 JW TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, 92?11190 JW et al, CHAPTER 11 Debtors. . Hearing Date: May 17, 1993 10:00 a.m. RESPONSE OF REORGANIZ FD DEBTORS IN OPPOSITION TO NOTICE OF MOTION FILING PROOF OF CLAIM OUT OF TIME 0 MAGDALENA RON The above captioned reorganized Debtors and Debtors?in?Possession ("Debtors") submit this response in oPPOsition to the Notice of Motion for filing Proof of Claim Out of Time of Magdalena Ron I It is respectfully submitted that this Motion should be denied in light of the fact that Ron was, in fact, sent a Notice of Claim in this bankruptcy proceeding. Attached hereto as Exhibit is a Certification of Mailing, previously filed with this Court, prepared by the Court?appointed claims agent, Claudia King Associates, indicating mailing to Magdalena Ron, 110 32nd Street, 98- . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486-1] Motion For Page 2 of 11 Union City, New Jersey 0708?. Ron, in her Certification, denies receiving any notice of the Bar Date in that she claims that she frequently had problems receiving mail at the premises. (See Certification of Ron in support of Motion). It is respectfully submitted that the Debtors did all that they were obligated to do . by sending a Notice of Claim to_Magdalena Ron. The Debtors cannot be held responsible for the creditors' collection of their mail. Therefore, in light of the fact that the notice was not returned, it must be presumed, pursuant to case law, that the notice was received: I In light of the fact that Notice of the Bar Date and Proof of Claim forni was timely' mailed ix) Ms. Ron, she has not met the standard codified hy' the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 3002(c)(3) and 9006(b)(1) which govern filing late proofs of claim. ARGUMENT A. i n_r_e_le_e_d__te_hn_e_lm The moving papers claim that Ron never received notice. Notwithstanding, there is a presumption that since notice was sent, notice was received. It? is widely held that properly stamped, addressed and mailed correspondence gives rise. to a presumption of receipt by addressee. i . 285 U.S. 427, 430 (1932): In re norwico Electronics. Inc., 131 B.R. 561, 573 (Bankr. D.N.J. In re Callahan Motors. Inc., 538 F.2d 76, 79 n. 13 (3d Cir. 1936); Nat?l State Bank of New Jersev rmi ?r i ,i 217 F. Supp. 341, 355?56 (D.N.J. 'R'r Case 92- 11188 JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 00: 10 Desc esponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486- 1] Motion For Page 3 of 11 1953). ?ee also. .I - ., 94 B.R. 329, 334 (Bankr. o. Vt. 1988). quihemrolmds, 99 9.12. 219 (D. Vt. 1939); In 1: A In .. 355 F.2d 455, 459 (7th Cir. 1988), cert, denied, 439 U.s. 1015 (1939); In re Lndustries,__lngl, 79 B.R. 244, 248 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1987), modjiied, 94 13.12. 42 (E.D. Pa. 1988); In re Rxan, 54 13.12. 105, 106-07 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1985): In re (Sresta, 40 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1984); In re American Properties, 1nd,, 30 B.R. 247, 250 (Bankr. D. Kansas 1983). This presumption. however, is rebuttable but is not raised until proper mailing is proved. in re Torwico Industries, 131 B.R. at 572; In re American gnopgrtigs, 30 B.R. at 250. Although the mailing employee is not required to testify, in the case of notice mailed by the court clerk, proper mailing procedures can be demonstrated by a showing that "notice was properly addressed, sent to the [creditor], and not returned to the Clerk's office," In re Longdginar, 855 F.2d at 460. These requisites have been demonstrated (see Certification of Mailing by Claudia King Associates, special agent to the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court, attached hereto as Exhibit therefore, the presumption of receipt is invohed. In addition, the Certification of Christine Jackson of Claudia King a Associates indicates that the notice was not returned. Although the Third Circuit has not addressed the issue of what constitutes sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of -3- Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 00: 10 Base .asponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486- 1] Motion For Page 4 of 11 receipt, a Bankruptcy Court in this District has expressly indicated its discontent with ioder, one case which is often relied upon for the proposition that testimony denying receipt of a properly mailed notice would suffice to rebut the presumption. gee ln_re_1oruico, 131 B.R. at 573 (commenting on 758 F.2d 1114, 1118 (6th Cir. 1985). In Iorwico Judge Stripp stated: To the extent that ?nder contains language extending its holding to cases where mailing is proven, it is clearly the minority' view, and its reasoning is unpersuasive. If a party were permitted to defeat the presumption of receipt of notice resulting f.rom the certificate of mailing by a single affidavit to .the contrary, the scheme of deadlines and bar dates under the Bankruptcy Code would come unraveled. 1d. at 573 (citing ;p_re??igketts, 80 B.R. 495 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1987). In accord-with the Debtors' view Judge Goldhaber has held that creditor's mere asserting that it did not receive notice of E1 debtor's bankruptcy proceedings is not sufficient to rebut . the presumption' of receipt." In re Crests, 40 B.R. 953, 955 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1904) (citations omitted). . WW 1 h_to_f 11mm Ron has not complied.?with the Third. Circuit's strict rules concerning the filing of a proof of claim. A creditor whose claim is scheduled as disputed, contanent or unliquidated must file a fixed by the Court. Fed. R. Bankr. proof of claim within the-time P. 3001(a). The Third Circuit has :"strictly interpreted the rules requiring the filing of a prpof of claim] under the Bankruptcy ?4n Case 92- 11188 Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00: 10 Base . asponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486- 1] Motion For Page 5 of 11 Code." Motors Qorp, v. gohooidorman, 940 F.2d 911, 912 (3d Cir. 1991) (quoting Mjig?got, 684 F.2d 1239Ir 242?43 (3d Cir. 1982); goo also in re super Eleotric Eroos. goro., 200 F.2d 790. 793 (3d Cir. 1953); strict rule in the matter of proofs of claims has always been observed in this circuit in re lno., 186 F.2d 130, 133 (3d Cir. 1950) ("the rule observed in this circuit has been a stricter one than that in many of the other Circuits"). A bankruptcy court has no disoretion to allow untimely claims simply because no prejudice would result or for any other equitable reason. . Vertientes. Ltd. v. Internor Erode. Ino. (Io re Vortientes 845 F.2d 57, 60 (3d Cir. 1988). There are several factors which may have to be considered. taken together, not merely prejudice.- (See Argument D). The purpose of these strict rules is to promote the efficient administration of bankruptcy cases. As the Third Circuit recently stated, restrictiveness in filing proofs of claim "is necessary in order to facilitate the expeditious administration of bankruptcy proceedings so that creditors do not have to wait an interminable length of time before a court determines their voting and distribution rights." ?ohnoiderman, 940 F.2d at 913. Compliance with these rules is particu?arly important in a prepackaged bankruptcy, where a swift, efficient administration of the case is the ultimate goal of the Debtors, their creditors and the Court. C.- A_lete Proof of glaim ghoul? not he filed peca Bankruptcy Rule 9006 auihorizes the Court to use its 5.. 1 Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 . _?sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486-1] Motion For Page 6 of 11 discretion to grant extensions on filing deadlines when failure to act was _a result of excusable neglect. "Excusable neglect is present when a party fails to meet an obligation due to unique or extraordinary circumstances. which are beyond the reasonable control of the delinquent party." In re Leasing Seryiges. lugp, 48 B.R. 824, 830 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985) The focus of Rule 9006 is on the movant's actions and the reasons for those actiOns, not on the effect that the extension might have on-the other parties' positions. In re South Atlantic Einangial 7d? F.2d 814 (11th Cir. 1985). In south ?il??tig. the Judge found that there was not a showing of excusable neglect where the movant argued that they failed to file a Proof of Claim because they believed that a Proof of Claim may have already been filed. The Court found that it was irrelevant whether or not the allowance of the filing of a late Proof of Claim would have a prejudicial effect on other creditors or the Debtor, rather, the Court was compelled to focus on the movant's actions and whether "failure to perform a duty was due to circumstances which were beyond the reasonable control of the person whose duty it was to perform." Lg. citing In re Gem Rail 12 B.R. 929, 939 (Bankr.EE.D.Pa. l981). Neglect is generally not eggusable where it results from lack at 11W 1 of sail Loner dn__a_r 1 semis of Laminate): practice. 39 Bit. 433, 437 (Bankr. B.R.I. 1984). (emphasis added) Egg also; Zhi re Heywam?, 15 B.R. 629 (Bankr. -5- Case 92 11188? JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc e'sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486- 1] Motion For Page 7 of 11 E.D.N.Y. 1981); gitisens Natignal Bank v, Parrish (In ;e_garrish), 13 B.R. 539 (Bankr. 1981); ir Peo nk Lanna 1 B. R. 387 (Bankr. M.D.Tenn. 1989): said We (Meta): 2 B-R- 485 (Bankr- 1989). chance the Debtors' position with regard to allowance of a late Ergo: of Claim, The Supreme Court, in a recent decision entitled Pioneer Investment Services Companv vs. Brunswick Associated Limited Partnership, .113 1489, (1993), considered the meaning of "excusable neglect" in deciding whether to allow a late filing of a Proof of Claim. In that decision, the: Court did, permit the creditor to file a late Proof of- Claim. However, it is respectfully submitted that the instant case is distinguishable in that the Supreme Court first made a threshhold decision that the bar date notice was ambiguous in ruling that there was excusable neglect. Therefore, once finding the notice to be ambiguous, the Court considered other factors in deciding whether or not to allow a late Proof of Claim. The Court stated: "The peculiar and inconspicuous placement of the bar date in the notice regarding the Creditors' meeting without any indication of the significance of .the bar date, left a' '-dramatic ambiguity' in the We conclude that the' un employed in this case uires the findigg that the _?Ql?9t of Reapon entS' counsel was, under all of 'the circumstan es, excusable." ,1d. at (emphasis ad ed) Once finding counsel's acti ns to be excusable, because of the i 1 t. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Deso . ?sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486-1] Motion For Page 8 of 11 ambiguous notice, the Court considered whether there was any evidence of prejudice to Petitioner or judicial administration of this case, or any indication at all of the bad faith. In concluding there was not, the Supreme Court held that the Bankruptcy Court abused its discretion in declining to find neglect to be excusable. id. Even if this Court should be inclined to employ the factors set forth in ,Bipneer, it is respectfully submitted that those factors would weigh in favor of the Debtor in this case. These include the "danger of prejudice to the Debtor, the length of the delay and its potential impact on judicial proceedings, the reason for the delay, including whether it was within the reasonable control of the movant, and whether the movant acted in good faith." 1d at p. 1498. It is respectfully submitted that the allowance of a late claim would prejudice the Debtors. The Order confirming the Plan of Reorganization was entered on or about April 30, 1992. It is over a year later, and the Debtors still have not been able to operate as a reorganized Debtor consistent with the financial structure that was to be implemented upon confirmatiOn of the Plan. It is prejudicial to ?he IDebtors to allow* clainm to be pursued which were discharged pursuant to the Order of Confirmation. Other than litigating certain disputed claims in Bankruptcy Court, this Bankruptcy proceeding should be closed. When one considers the "reason for the delay" and whether it -3- 'i Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed 05110/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Dear: Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assomates In Opposition To [480-1] Motion For Page 9 of11 was "in control of the movant", the factors would also weigh in favor of the Debtors. Ron has; an excuse for not receiving the Proof of Claim that was absolutely beyond the control of the Debtors. that is. that Ron is:aa "transient 'who .often does not receive her mail? (See Certification of counsel submitted. with moving papers). When one considers whether the delay was in control of the movant of whether it was in control of the Debtors. one would have to control that it was in control of the movant. notwithstanding that she claims to have frequent problems receiving her mail. with regard to whether the movant acted in "good faith", it is respectfully submitted that the movant has not made an affirmative showing that the delay' was in? good' faith and therefore. that factor should also be presumed to favor the Debtors. Therefore. all of the factors espoused by the Supreme Court weigh in favor of the Reorganized Debtors. CONCILUSION For the foregoing reasons, Debtors respectfully request that Ron's Motion to File a Late Claim be denied. SCHWARTZ. TOBIA a STANZIALE Attorneys for Debtors By: JENN rhi?f?oisw STONE Dated: May 10, 1993 2541N i - Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/10 14:00:10 Desc Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486-1] Motlon For Page 10 of 11 Z?Zl;ifaanr SCHWARTZ, TOBIA 5: STANZIALE A Professional Association I 22 Crestmont Road f?y Montclair, New Jersey 07042 (201) 746-6000 JU Sb hr, Ji By: js/ nifer D. Stone i - STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT In re: FOR THE DISTRICT OF TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, Case Nos. 92-11188 Jw st sl-. 92-11189 JW Debtors. 92-11190 JW CHAPTER 11 CERTIFICATION PF MAILING I, Christine Hurney Jackson, declare as follows: 1. I am over the age of eig teen years and an associate of Claudia King Associates, Inc., 6' York Street, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302. 2. I certify that on the 19gb day of March, 1992, I served copies of the Notice of 341 Meetidg; Notice of Deadline for the Filing of Certain Proofs of Claim? Proof of Claim and Notice of Hearing to Consider (1) Approval of the Debtors; Disclosure Statement and'(b) Prepetition Solicfation of Votes with Respect to Their Plan and (ii) the Confirmatioi of That Plan to the following creditor: CREDITOR #25620 110 32ND STREET UNION CITY, NJ 07087 by depositing a true copy thereof in postage pre-paid envelopes and delivered to an official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal Service within the State of New Jersey for delivery by first?class mail. .4 I Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 498 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [486-1] Motion For Page 11 of 11 3. I certify that as of the i4th day of November, 1992, that the above-mentioned notices sent to the referenced creditor has not been returned as non-deliverable. i declare under penalty of pe?jury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 4th day of November, 1992, at Jersey City, New Jersey. 5 Chrietine Hurde? Jackson gage Dog 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 8 Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assogiates In To [2101?1] Motion To Fi 13:9; 1 of 14 SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE A Professional Association 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, New Jersey 07042 (201) 745?5000 Co?counsel for Debtors By: JENNIFER D. STONE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In re: . CASE NOS. 92?11188 JW 92?11189 JW TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, 92?11190 JW et a1, CHAPTER 11 Debtors. Hearing Date: May 17, 1983 10:00 a.m. RESPONSE OF REORGANIZ DEBTORS IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION OF MAJED I LDRABSHE TO FILE A CLAIM OUTOFHME The above captioned? reorganized Debtors and Debtors?in?Possession ("Debtors") submit this response in opposition to the Motion of Majed Aldrabshe ("Aldrabshe") to File a Claim Out of Time. It is respectfully snbmitted that this Motion should be denied in light of the fact that Aldrabshe was, in fact, sent a Notice of Claim in this bankruptcy proceeding. Submitted herewith is a Declaration of Mailing prepared by the Court-appointed claims agent, Claudia King Associates, indicating mailing to Aldrabseh, Majed, 924 Garret Rd, Upper Darby, PA 19082. Aldrabshe. DY his Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 409 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc ssponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assomates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 2 of 14 QOunsel, claims that there was?e: deficiency ix: the smiling and that; is why the nqtige was not: received in that the notice was mailed without the apartment number -on the address. Aldrabshe further argues that Aldrabshe's name did not appear on the lease and therefone it could not have been received. (See Motion of Aldrabshe, page It is: respectfully submitted that the Debtors did all they were obligated to do by sending the notice to the address without the apartment number. Attached hereto as Exhibit is a copy of the incident report, filled out by Aldrabshe, as well as the mehical chart, also filled out by Aldrabshe. The Court should note that the address filled out by Mr. Aldrabshe on both the incident report and the medical treatment chart did ugh include the asartment number. How could the Debtors possibly be obligated 'to mail the notice to an apartment number that was not provided to them by the claimant? Counsel for Aldrabshe is making an unreasonable demand in expecting the iDebtors, on. their own, to seek. out the apartment number of every claimant that files a report with the ?hotel. Hence, the mailing was not deficient. Therefbre, in light of the fact that the notice was not returned, it must be presumed, pursuant to case law, that the motice was received. In light of the fact that dotice of the Bar Date and Proof of Claim fornt was timely' mailed L1) Aldrabshe, he has not -met the standard codified by the Federal Rules of ?Bankruptcy Procedure 3002(c)(3) and 9006(b)(l) which govern filing late proofs of Claim. RI 1 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 499 Filed 05(10/93 Entered 05/17/16 140010 . . -.- esc ,sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assomates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 3 of 14 A. ggtige is presumed to hdxe_be e'v The moving papers claim that Aldrabshe never received notice. Notwithdtanding. there is a presumption that since notice was sent. notice was received. ;It is widely held that properly stamped. addressed and mailed correspondence gives rise to a presumption of receipt by addressee. Haqner v. United States. 285 U.S. 427. 430 (1932); in re Teretge Electron" In . 131 B.R. 561. 573 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1991); In re Callahan Motors. Inc.. 538 F.2d 76. 79 n. 13 (3d Cir. 19i6); Nat'l State Bank of New Jersev rm? 0 i . :217 E2 Supp. 341. 355?56 (D.N.J. 1963). see also. 19 ;e Enterprises. Inc.. 94 B.R. 329. 334 (Bankr. o. Vt. 1933). '1 th . 99 B.R. 219 (D. Vt. 1989); In re Lonoardner Assoc's.. Inge. 855 F.2d 455. 459 (7th Cir. 1988). . ni . 489 U.S. 1015 (1989B.R. 244. 248 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. [1987). modi?ed. 94 B.R. .42 (1:11.19. Pa. 1938): in re dead. 54 B.R. 105. 106?07 (Bankr. E.D. =Pa. 1985); 131 re create. 40 B.R. 953. 955 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1984); levge American Eroperties. Ing.. 30 B.R. 247. 250 (Bankr. D. Kansas 1983). This presumption. however. is rebuttable but is not raised until proper mailing is proved. in re Torwico Industries. 131 B.R. at 572; In re American Properties. 30 B.R. at 250. Although the mailing employee is not required to testify. in the case of .notice mailed by the court clerk. proper mailing 1 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 4 of 14 procedures can be demonstrated by a showing that "notice was properly addressed, sent to Hie [creditor], and not returned to the Clerk's office." :n r, 855 F.2d at 460. These requisites have been demonstrated (see Certification of Mailing by Claudia King Associates, special' agent to the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court, submitted heLewith) therefore, the presumption of receipt is invoked. In addition, the Certification states that the notice was not returned. Although the Third Circuit has not addressed the issue of what constitutes sufficient evidende to rebut the. presumption of receipt, a Bankruptcy Court in this District has expressly indicated its discontent with nger, one case which is often relied upon for the proposition that testimony denying receipt of a properly mailed notice would suffice to rebut the presumption. gee In re Torwigo, 131 B.R. at 573 (commenting on In_re Xoder, 758 F.2d 1114, 1118 (6th Cir. 1985). In Judge Stripp stated: To the extent that gods; contains language extending its holding to cases where mailing is proven, it is clearly the Ininority' view, and its reasoning is unpersuasive. If a party were permitted to defeat the presumption of receipt of notice resulting from the certificate of mailing by a single a?fidavit to the contrary, the scheme of deadline and bar dates under the Bankruptcy Code would ?bme unraveled. is; at 573 (citing In re Rick%tts, 30 B.R. 495 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1987). In accord with the Deb?ors' view Judge Goldhaber has held that creditor's mere asserting that it did not receive notice of a debtor's bankruptcy proceedings is not sufficient to rebut i i Re Case Doc 499 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc *sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assocnates In OppositiOn To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 5 of 14 the presumption of receipt." In re Crests. 40 B.R. 953, 955 J(Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1984) (citations omitted_n1 Aldrabshe has not complief with the Third Circuit's strict rules concerning the filing of proof of claim. A creditor whose claim is scheduled as disputed. contingent or unliquidated must file a proof of claim within the time fixed by the Court. Fed. R. Bankr..P. 3001(a). The 'Third Circuit has ?strictly interpreted the rules requiring the filing of a ?proof of. clain1 under the Bankruptcy Code940 F.2d 911, 912 (3d Cir. 1991) (quoting In re Piggot. 684 F.2d 239. 242-43 (3d Cir. 1982); See also In re Super Electric Prods. Corp? 200 F.2d 790. 793 (3d Cir. 1953); strict rule in the matter of proofs of claims has always been observed in this circuit ln_;e rni In 186 F.2d 1'30Ir 133 (3d Cir. 1950) (?the rule observed in this circuit has been a stricter one than that in many of the other circuits"). A bankruptcy court has no discretion to allow untimely claims simply because no prejudice would result or for any other equitable reason. Vertientes. Ltd. v. Internor Trade. Inc. (In re Vertientesi Ltd.). 845--F.2d 57. 60 .(3d Cir. 1988). There are several fact rs that may have to be considered. not merely prejudice. (See dis ussion Point D). The purpose of these strict rules is to promote the efficient administration of bankruptcy c?ses. As the Third Circuit recently Case 92? 11188 Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 00: 10 Desc esponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposition To [481- 1] Motion To Fi Page 6 of 14 stated, restrictiveness in filing proofs of claim "is necessary in order to facilitate the expeditious administration of bankruptcy proceedings so that creditors do not have to wait an interminable length of time before a court determines their voting and distribution rights." ?ghneide?man, 940 F.2d at 913. Compliance with these rules is particulirly important in a prepackaged bankruptcy, where a swift, efficient administration of the case is the ultimate goal of the Debtors, their creditors and the Court. C. Bankruptcy Rule 9006 authorizes the Court to use its discretion to grant extensions on filing deadlines when failure to act was a result of excusable neglect. "Excusable neglect is present when a party fails to meet an obligation due to unique or extraordinary circumstances, which are beyond the reasonable control of the delinquent party." ?in y' 48 B.R. 824, 830 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1985) The focus (as Rule 9006 is (n1 the nmvant's actions and the reasons for those actions, not on the.effect that the extension might have on the other parties' positions. 1 'c w, 767 F.2d 8154 (11th Cir. 1985). In South Atlantis, the Judge found thkt- there. was not Ia showing of excusable neglect where the movint argued that they failed to file a Proof of Claim because they believed that a Proof of Claim may have already been filed. The dourt found that it was irrelevant whether or not the allowance (if the filing of a late Proof of I Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc esponse Of Debtor Trump?Plaza Assomates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 7 of 14 Claim would have a puejudicial effect on other creditors or the Debtor, rather, the Court was compelled to focus on the movant's actions and whether "failure to perform a dutyT was due to Circumstances which were beyond the reasonable control of the person whose duty it was to perform." 1d. citing In re Gem Rail gorge. 12 B.R. 929. 939 (Bankr. t.D.Pa. 1981). Neglect is generally no; where it results from leek practice. In. re iLopez. 39 B.R. 433, 437 (Bankr. D.R.I. 1984). (emphasis added) See s1?gi 15 B.R. 529 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1981); Qitizens ?etioeel Bank v, Perrieh (In re Parrish), 13 B.R. 539 (Bankr. 1981); Eirst Peoples National Eenk Young (In re Yooeg), 1 B.R. 387 (Bankr. M.D.Tenn. 1989); Reid 11qu (Mt-151m). 2 13.12. 435 (Bankr. 1989). D. The Supreme Court decision. in Pioneer Investment does not change; late Prop?_of Claim. The Supreme Court, in a recent decision entitled Pioneer In nt rvi pen: vs. Bronewiek Limited Partnership. 113 1489 @1993) considered the meaning of ?excusable neglect" in to allow a late filing of a1 Proof of Claim. In that de ision. the Court did permit the creditor to file a late Pr of of Claim. However; it is- respectfully submitted that thejinstant case is distinguishable in that the Supreme Court first mdde a threshhold decision that the I 7- Case 92-11189-JHW Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:00:10 Desc esponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assocates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 8 of 14 her date notice was ambiguous. Therefore, once finding the notice to be ambiguous, the Court then considered other factors in deciding whether or not to allow a late Proof of Claim. The Court stated: the bar date 'in th notice regarding the Creditors' meeting without any indication of the -significance of the bar date, left a 'dramatic ambiguity' in the We conclude that the unusual form of notice employed in this case ?egpires the finding that "The peculiar and placement of the neglect of Respoedents' counsel was, under all of the circumstances, excusable." id. at (emphasis added) a Once finding counsel's actions to be escusable, because of the ambiguous notice, the Court considered whether there was any evidence of prejudice to the Petitioner or to judicial administration of the case, or any indication at all of the bad faith. In concluding there was not, the Supreme Court held that the Bankruptcy Court abused its discretion in declining to find neglect to be excusable. id. Even if this Court should be inclined to employ the factors set forth in .Eigneer, it is respectfully submitted that those factors would weigh in favor of the Debtor in this case. These include the "danger of prejudic? to the Debtor, the length of the delay and its potential impact In judicial proceedings, the reason for the delay, including whet er it was within the reasonable control of the movant, and ether the movant, acted in good faith." 1d at p; 1498. It is respectfully submitted that the allowance of a late :i 48- i RF Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc ~sponse Of Debtor Trump Plaza Assocates In Opposition To [481-1] Motion To Fi Page 9 of 14 claim woold prejudice the Debtors. The Order confirming the Plan of Reorganization was entered on or about April 30, 1992. It is over a year later, and the Debtors still have not been able to operate as reorganized Debto-s consistent with the financial structure that. was to be implemented. upon confirmation. It is prejudicial to the Debtors toiallow claims to be pursued which were discharged pursuant to the Order of Confirmation. other than litigating certain disputed claims in Bankruptcy Court, this Bankruptcy proceeding should be Closed. When one considers the "reason for the delay" and whether it was "in control of the movant", these factors would also weigh in favor of the Debtors. Aldrabshe has an excuse for not receiving the Proof of Claim that was absolutely beyond the control of the Debtors. that is,r that the apartment number was not listed as part of the address. Aldrabshe argues that Trump Plaza had an obligation to include his apartment number. but the creditor himself did not provide Trump Plaza with the apartment number and Trump Plaza certainly would not have an affirmative obligation to seek out the apartment number for every claimant. When one considers whether the delay Was in control of the movant or whether it-was in control of the Debtors, clearly one would have to conclude that it was in control of the movant. With regard to whether the movant acted in "good faith", it is respectfully submitted that the movant has not made an affirmative showing that the delay was in good faith and therefore, that -9- Case 92- 11188 Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14. 00: 10 Desc Response Of Debtor Trump Plaza Associates in Opposition To [481- 1] Motion To Fi Page 10 of 14 factor should also be presumed to favor the Debtors. Therefore, all of the factors espoused by the Supreme Court weigh in favor of the Reorganized Debtors. CONCLUSION For the above reasons, Debtors respectfully request that Aldrabshe's Motion to File a Late Claim be denied. SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE Attorneys for Debtors Mme?a Jamar? EB DREW STONE Dated: May 10, 1993 2542N i 88 J-I-IW DOC 499 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc -. Trump Plaza Associates [481- 1] Motion To Fi Pageiig??i?? 45% 3.991 TRUMP 953? was? THE BOARDWALK KT MISSISSIPI AVE. ATLANTIC ??401 INCIDENT DATE: 5?0/57/?9? TIME DEPARTMENT INCIDENT PATRONS 61/ ADDRESS - 7/6 9 CITY '06?be TE .ZIP CODE NAME OF EMPLOYEES INVOLEDWKX 64b;? NAME OF SUPERVISOR IF MONEY INVOLVED - AMOUNT DESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT. omtd (fwd/WW C/?f/x C/xowde/ 71:) CM ?/zz Some/?ag SCI/mick my 0429/3 7L4k<7 mm} 0270/ 61/49 c7 ?ex'CC 0/035 AH 44/5 74AM "T/md SL100 ?Jtld [/iOl/L OJ: M11441) 22* 5:52:71 4432/1 wail/5.124124? Siame?fca C3 ?aw ?Nip/Mtg dry/CV Mm/ [deg [02: (Am/4% we. M/?waw/ we Play/m ACE/wee (?lam 0514942 Gama/41192:? We Ame! awn/a4 0? am we SALE kW Eo?w SIGNATURE OF PERSON COMPLETING INCIDENT A .237ng DID PATRONS SEE NURSE.YES NO REFUSE IF MORE SEACE IC NEEDED.PLEASE #83 BACK OF THIS FORM. ij/ix?" Case 92- 11188 Doc 499 Filed 05/10/93 ?ResponseOf Debtor Trump Plaza Associates In Opposit .- Entered 05/17/16 14. 00: 10 Best: - [on To [481- 1] MotiOn To Fi Page ?cum SERVER Feed prices sub]. to 7% sales tax. Bey; 'to 7%.sales FOOD TOTAL L01 22316- EUR 03? HE CHIRJDER A SRCUM 5; CH2 913?;ng HELL LJPEH FACE GRa'il' URE- 3 SALES TAX BEV. TOTAL Case 92- Doc 499 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:00: 10 P2132013 of 14* Response Of Debtor Plaza Associates 481- Motion To F__i 2?7 momma MEDICAL ARRATRERT CHART . ACCIDENT Gu?srs ONLY 1 ILLNESS 'l . . . I 01.0de PEREBY: AUTHORIZE mamas-r: I FURTHER AUTHORIZE THAT THIS REPORT MAYI BE USED 7? PLAZA HOTEL, It's ADJUSTERS, AGENTS, Wt Arab DUO . RM-.. Pam NAME 2 noon WEEK 'rn -. MR (1:2:ka soczAL Mm - m? Upper 7901?; . ., err! s'rATE/zn c6612" 2.- HISTORY NMMW WM MEDICATIONS BEING TAKEN I/m FEMALE, Db YOU SUSPECT YOU .ARE. ALLERGIES . 4..?12 OCCURRED, wAs (x 3030) Arms; . i. )020 {mm LOCATION ?w - - DETAILS or Accxnem 0R ILLNESS Ma?am IAW Qaew?fmi - a; BUPitu I .. . II 1n n39" IV In Iii?"H II Mr?' FII 10493.1; 05/17/16 14. 00: 10 Base agate 81? W?FURTHER TREATMENT IRECOMMENDBD 10. Is A52 INDICATION IEE USE or names on ALCOHOL MAI EAVE BEEN In IE3 ?4 no OPINION . i? . smarunz or . - Wig? we courLEIEn 49now an: PATIENT AT MEDICAL migrant/.mucmn ESCORTED agj5177 - How DID PATIENT MEDICAL ELLE WHEELCHAIR EsconIEn HAVE -BEEN ADVISED BY MEDICAL PERSOWNEL AT TRUMP PLAZA MEDICAL UNIT. THAT HY CONDITION WOULD BEST 32 TREATED A 8 HOWEVER. I HEREBY DECLINE TO ACCEPT HEIR OPINION: TO ANY HOSPITAL. HEREBY AGREE TO BOLD Inuup PLAZA THE MEDICAL or MEDICAL STATION HARHLESS FROM ANY LI As A RESULI or HI I0 83 IAANSPOAIED TO A HOSPIIAL As .REOU STED BI THE MEDICAL UNIT PERSONNEL. ADVICE OR TRARSPORTATION 9311HITNEFS Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 500 Filed 0?5/10393 Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc Certificate Of Service By Claudia Kingand Assoc: tes Inc. For Debtor Trump Page 1 of 2 31m? SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE A Professional Association 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, New Jersey 07042 (201) 746-6000 Attorneys for BY: 15/ Jennifer?n. Stone D. STONE (JDS ?t130a) . UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT In re: -- FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case Nos. 92-11188 JW gt 92?11189 JW Debtors. 92-11190 JW 1 CHAPTER 11 CERTIFICATION QF MAILING I: Dana Martin, declare as follows: 1. I am over the age of eighteen years and an employee of Claudia King Associates, Inc., 66 York Street, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302. 2. I certify that on the 19th day of March, 1992, I served copies of the Notice of 341 Meeting; Notice of Deadline for the Filing of Certain Proofs of Claim; Proof of Claim and Notice of Hearing to Consider Approvaliof the Debtors{ Disclosure Statement and Prepetition SoliFiation of Votes with Respect to Their Plan and (ii) the Confirmation of That.Plan to the following creditor: CREDITOR NUMBER: 26618 ALDRABSEH MAJED 924 GARRET RD. UPPER DARBY, PA 19082 by depositing a true copy thereof in postage pre-paid envelopes and delivered to an official depository under the exclUSive care and custody of the United States Postal Service within the State of New Jersey for delivery by first-class mail. ?00. u? . iv a 92-11188-JHW Doc 500 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:00:10 Desc CertF?ceSIte?Qf Service By Claudia King and Assomatee Inc. For Debtor Trump PI Page 2 0f 2 3. I certify that as of the 7th day of May: 1993, that the above-mentioned notices sent to the referenced creditor has not been returned as non-deliverable. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 7th day of May, 1993, at Jersey City, New Jersey. Dana Martin Case 92-11188-JHW Dog 501 Filed 9500/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc ?aring (Minute Sheet filed) Re: [486-1] Motion For Permission To File A Proof Page 1 of 1 United States Bankruptcy Court Courtroom #11, 2nd Floor 15 North 7th Street Camden, New Jersey 08102-1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur MINUTE 05/31?0/93 lq:00 Docket 92?11188 Debtor: Trump?Plaza Associates Adversary Docket 00-00000 Matter: Motion to File Proof of Claim Out of Time Filed on: 04/12/93 Creditor: Raymond Gill for Magdalena Ron Other Appearances: Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party Note: Granted Order Denied Order ii - ?4k /0 Withdrawn COTBS 1 Adjourned to 51 '3 at Other MISCELLANEOUS: Adjourned Dates: Priority: Chapter: Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 502 Filed 05/10/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc . Hearing (Mlnute Sheet ?led), Re: [481-1] Motion To File A Proof Of glaim Out Of Page 1 of 1 United States nkruptoy Court Courtroom 2nd Floor 15 North th Street Camden, New Je sey 08102?1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur MINUTE 05/16/93 10%00 Docket 92-11188 Debtor: Trump's Plaza Associates Adversary 0Qcket 00-00000 Matter: Motion to File Late Claim Filed On: 04/08/93 Hanahan for Majed Aldrabseh other Appearancies: . Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party Note: Isranted Order Denied Order - Withdrawn comes Adjourned to Sim/Q75 at Other MISCELLANEOUS: Adjourned Dates: Priority: Chapter: 11 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc; 50.4 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:20: 2 Desc Debtor T9 Produce Doguments PurSLJant To qupoena Issued Page 15-4., 1 431555: a 1.31993 DEAN c. WALDT. ESQUIRE (12mm?) QM REBERKENNY 9:9. mi?wv?y 499 Cooper Landing Road ?_4333% P.O. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 03992 (609) 667f6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller U3 mn? UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11139 TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) Debtors. Hearing Date:- ORDER PRODUCTION OF AND NOW, this [3 day of May. 1993, upon consideration of the Motion To Compel Production 9: Documents Pursgant To ?gopoena filed by McGahn, Friss Miller ("Movant") in the above-re?erenced case (the "Motion"), npon_notice and hearing thereon, and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: l. Clapp Eisenberg shall comply with-that portion of the subpoena directed to Clapp Eise?berg in this case dated April 8: 1993 referring to its billing anditime records related to litigation under Docket No. as originally captioned Boardwalk Properties? Inc. and v, BPHQ Acquisition. lng. and BPHC Parking ggrp., together with any and all related appellate filings and federal court litigation (collectively . Co Case Doc 504 Filed 05/13/93 Entered 05/17/16 14. 20: 02 Desc Qrder.Compelling Debtor To Produce Documents Pursuant To Subpoena Issued By Page 2 of 2 the "Penthouse Litigation") for the inclusive time period of March 19s9 through October 1991: 2. Clapp Eisenberg shall groduce any and all such documents in response to the subpoena at its offices in Newark, New Jersey no oa/cace cs?h?evemeg later than 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, May 12, for inspection and copying by Movant's counsel, copying to be at Movant's expense; 3. Clapp Eisenberg may redact those portions of the subject documents which contain information not previously disclosed to or known by the Movant as to which the attorney/client privilege is asserted, provided that a specific explanation of the basis for such claim of privilege is.provided with respect to such redactions; 4. Debtor and Movant have stipulated that the Clapp Eisenberg firm had no substantial involvement in the zoning hearing matters or the prerogative writ litigation referred to in the subpoena. th H. Wizm MJudge ted State Bankruptcy Court COPY of this Order to be sent to: DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ Attn: Dean C. Waldt, Esquire 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for Movant, McGahn, Frifs Miller 1704R.l I exit; La# Exaaoch:/I ,QAZcxxi /Vh?t; cirea?Cq?eaxhsai/ ?as, Me Mr Wczh/ Am?km?/ 1 Ca. 92-11188-JHW Dec 503 Filed 05/14/93 Entered 051.17/16 14:20:02 Base Consen Order Extending Bar Date For The Filing Of A ProofOLClaIm As To Anto: Page JAMES J. WALDRON Cw I Law Offices of LEONARD F. KAPPA, gen. MAY 14 1933 731 North Wood Avenue, 1.3.0. Box 1:430 9-5- BANKRUPTCY con?, Linden, New Jersey 07036 CA 5 1' I (998) 925?6565 Attorney for Plaintiff(s) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCX COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In re TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, (CHAPTER 11) a .- et a1. Case Nos. 0?11188 Debtors. 0-11189 9 ?11190 CONSENT ORDER OF THE BANKRUP CY COURT EXTENDING THE BAR ALLOWING THE EDITORS, ANTOINETTE GALIANO AND TO NOTICE OF CLAIM AND FOR ORDER OF THE BANKRUPTCY COU FROM HEARING AND DETERMINING DISPUTES RELATIN TO TIMELY FILED PERSONAL INJURY AND GRANTING R-LIEF FROM THE INJUNCTION IMPOSED BY 11 U.S.C. SECTION 524 Leonard F. Rappa, Esq. of Law Firm of Leonard F. Rappa, P.A., appearing on behalf of the Creditors, Antoinette Galiano and Antonio Galiano and Jennifer Stcine, Esq., of the Law Firm of Schwartz, Tobia and Stanziale appearing on behalf of the debtors, Trump Plaza Associates, and the parties having consented to the entry of this Order extending the bar date extended by a prior Order of the Bankruptcy Court dfted January 9, 1993 and thus authorizing the filing of a Not .ce of Claim on behalf of the creditors, Antoinette Galiano and Antonio'Galiano; and the Court having considered the application cf the Creditors; and the parties having consented to the entry of this Order; and for good cause Typed and Proofed by kr 3 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 503 Filed 05/14/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:20:02 Desc Consent Order Extending Bar Date For The Filing Of A Proof Of Claim As To Antoi Page 2 of 2 showni;7%z 1993 hereby ORDERED that the bar dateE be thus authorizing Creditors, Antoinette Galiano and Antonio Galiano to file a Proof of Claim within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, said Proof of Claim to be considered mely filed; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that edch and every ordering paragraph contained in the January 9, 1993 Order not related to the extension granted in the proceeding ordering paragraph, shall remain in full force and effect, said January 9, 1993 Order is hereby incorporated 0W if? Mg . ONARD - Jaw/$3 herein by reference. ttorney for Cred' s, Atto .y or Trump Associates Antoinette Galia nd Antonio Galiano. Typed and Proofed by kr a . M'inUtes Of Telephone Confe@e Call Held On May 12 1993 Rwrding Form Of 0rd Page 1 cf 1 .. m? -. was-- 'v .. Case DOC 505 Filed 05/141?93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:02 Desc we 1 was; a. meme. swear. STATES COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 1 ,1 1995; CAMDEN v.3. 5' one In the Matter of Case Nonggezigigg 92-11139 Trumg Plaza Associates, 92-11190 Debtor PARTICIPANTS: Dean Waldt. Esq. Arthur Abramowitz, Esq. Salvatore Alfano, Esq. MINUTES OF CONFERENCE CALL HELD 12. 1993 The form of order compelling production of documents was discussed. Additional protective meaSures regarding records upon. of Clapp and Eisenberg were agreed Dated: May 1993 Copies mailed this day of I Dean Waldt, Esq. Arthur Abramowitz, Esq. Salvatore Alfano, Esq. . it Case 92- ~11188- Dec 510 Filed 05/17/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 02 Desc Hearing (Minute Sheet filed) Re: [486- 1] Motion For Permission To File A Proof United States Bankruptcy Court Courtroom 1, 2nd Floor 15 North 2th Street Camden, New Jersey 08102-1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur MIN 05/1 /93 10 09 Docket 92-11188 Debtor: Trump Alaza Associates Adversary Docket 00?00000 Matter: Motion to File Proof of Cla In Out of Time? Filed on. 04/12/93 i Creditor: Raymond Gill for Magdalena Ron other Appearanoes: Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Page 1 of 1 Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party Note: Granted Order Denied Order Withdrawn Adjourned to 'g ngf? at I Other MISCELLANEOUS: Adjourned Dates: 05/10/93 Priority: Chapter: 1 Case DOC 511 Filed 05/17/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Hearing (Minute Sheet filed) Re: [481-1] Motion To File A Proof Of Claim Out Of Page 1 9f 1 United States Bankruptcy Court Courtroom 2nd Floor 15 Merthi7th Street Camden, New Jbrsey 08102-1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur MINUTE 05/i7/93 13:00 Docket Debtor: Trumpfs Plaza Associates Adversary Docket 00*00000 Matter: Motion to File Late Claim Filed on: 04/08/93 Hanahan for Majed Aldrabseh Other Appearances: Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party Granted Order Denied Order Withdrawn COTBS Adjourned to at i Other MISCELLANEOUS: Adjourned Dates: 05/10/93 Priority: Chapter: 11 TM. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 51.2 Filed Entered 14:20:03 .Desc "B?ef By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn and Miller In Support Page 1 of 10 ARTHUR J. ABRAMQWITZ, ESQUIRE (A33724) ., ii?fm. DEAN C. WALDT, ESQUIRE (DW8367) 5" DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road P.o. BOX 5459 Cherry Hill, no 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for?McGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: 3: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, . 92?11190 (JW) Dehtors. Hearing Date: BRIEF IN SUPPORT or MOTION IN-LIMINE REGARDING After the close of business on Friday, May 14, 1993, one business day before trial Debtor, Trump Plaza Associates ("Trump?) served a number of documents purporting to be "summaries" under Fed. R. Evid. 1006 upon counsel for the creditor McGahn, Fries Miller ("McGahn"). Due to the late service of the purported summaries and their voluminous nature, McGahn has not had the opportunity to review the purported summaries in their entireties for accuracy and completeness.l/ However, two aspects relative to these documents were immediately clear from even the briefest l/ McGahn reserves the right to later move for the exclusion of the purported summaries on these grounds in the event that the Court dOes not grant the present motion in limine. Si Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 512 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Brief By Arthur .J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Friss and Miller [n Support Page 2 of 10 overview of the purported summaries. First, the purported summaries are not in fact summaries at all as intended by Fed. R. Evid. 1006. Although they supposedly summarize the legal bills that comprise Exhibit P?l (116 pages), they restate, rehash, and needlessly repeat the contents of those legal bills at a far greater length (442 2/ pages) than the underlying, evidential documents." Second, at The seven volumes of the purperted summaries are entitled: (1) Proposed Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Time and Fees for Preparation and Attendance of Attorneys from the Firm of McGahn, Friss Miller for-Depositions as Counsel for Trump Plaza Associates in re: 1k Pr i In BPH Acguisition, Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County, Docket No. April 1990 September 1991 (63 pages) (hereinafter referred to as "Deposition Preparation and Attendance Summary"); (2) Proposed Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Time and Fees for Research of Attorneys from the Firm of McGahn, Friss a Miller for Trump Plaza Associates in re: Boardwal Pr In v. BPHQ Acquisition, Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County, Docket No. April 1990 October 1991 (33 pages): (3) Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Attorney Fees for Correspondence Review by the Firm of McGahn, Friss Miller as Counsel for Trump Plaza Associates in re: Boardwalk Properties. Inc. v. BPHC AAcquisition [sic]. In Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County, Docket No. April 1990 - October 1991 (24 pages); (4) Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Attorney Fees for Preparation and Court Appearances by the Firm of McGahn, Friss Miller as Counsel for Trump Plaza Associates in re: Boardwalk Properties. Inc. v. BPHC Acquisition. Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey; Chancery Division, Atlantic County, Docket No. April 1990 October 1991 (26 pages); (5) Federal Rueles [sic] of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Attorney Fees for ?Conferences and/or Meetings" by the Firm of McGahn, Friss Miller as Counsel for Trump Plaza Associates in re: Boardwalk Propertiesl Inc. v. BPHC Acquisition, Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Atlantic County, Docket No. (34 pages); (6) Proposed Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1006 Summary of Time and Fees for Miscellaneous Duties Performed by the Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller Attorneys for Boardwalk Properties. Inc. v. rump Plaza Associates in re: BPHC Acquisition, Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery No. April 1990 Division, Atlantic County, Docket October 1991 (64 pages); and (7) Cost Centers of McGahn, Friss Attorney/Law Clerk, April 1990 Milleris Statement by October 1991 (184 pages). -4- Case 92-11188-JHW 12092512 Filed 05/181533 Entered 95/17/16) 14:20:03 Dose Brief By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor'McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 3 of 10 least one of the purported summaries contains extra?record factual argument. Plaintiff cannot, through the guise of a summary, incorporate argumentative and editorial information which should not be characterized as summaries to improperly elevate its arguments into evidentiary exhibits. Moreover, the purported "summaries" are inadmissible under the Best Evidence Rule and fail a Fed. R. Evid. 403 analysis. as well as Rule 1006. discussed in?ra. LAW AND ARGUMENT THE PURPORTED SHOULD NOT BE ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE BECAUSE THEY.AEE NOT SUMMARIES AT ALL. I. A. The Underlying-Documents Are Not As Volumingus As The "Summaries," Trump seeks the admission of the purported "summaries" under Fed. R. Evid. 1006 which provides: The contents of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in Court may be presented in the form of?a chart, summary or calculation. The originals, or duplicates, shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at reasonable time and place. The Court may order that they be produced in Court. As threshold matters, under this Rule, summaries are admissible where: the underlying writings are voluminous, Javelin Investment. S.A. v. MUnicipalitv df Ponce, 645 F.2d 92, 96 (let Cir. 1981) (criticising admission of one i 558, page summary of three invoices); United States v. Scales, 594 F.2d 562 (6th Cir. 1979) cert. den. 441 U.S. 946 (1978) (noting 161 exhibits comprising underlying documents were voluminous); and (2) the underlying writings are such that they cannot be conveniently States v. ?ghnson, 594 F.2d 1253, ramined in Court. E. United i255 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. den. Case Doc 512 Filed 05/18/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Brief By Arthur J. Abramow?itz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 4 of 10 444 0.8. 964 (1979). Fed. R. Evid. 1006 is, therefore, a rule of convenience. Trump's purported "summaries" do not even meet these two threshold tests. First. the underlying documents for these ?summaries" are not so voluminous that they cannot be conveniently examined in Court. Exhibit P?l contains 116 pages of typed time records. In contrast. the summarits contain 432 pages close to four times the number of pages of the very documents that the summaries purport to summarise. In short, Trump is attempting to turn a rule of cenvenience into a rule of inconvenience, by attempting to place in evidence long?winded analyses of a document already in evidence as "summaries." This Court should exclude the purported "summaries" because they are anything but summaries. B. The Purported Summaries Contain Information Not Present In The Oxidinal Documents. The law is clear that a summary must be a summary. In other words? a summary must be "based upon and fairly represent competent evidence already before the [finder of fact]." United States v. Johnson, supra, 594 F.2d at 1257, and-everything contained in the summaries must be supported by the proofs. United States v. Wood, 943 F.2d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing The United States v. Soulard, 730 F.2d 1292, 1300 (9th Cir. 1984)). In the present case, it is cle that the purported summaries sponsored by Trump include extra?record information. For example, the Deposition Preparation and Attendance Summary includes a recapitulation of the McGahn attorrey time spent attending the depositions of Albert J. Cohen on rebruary 27, 1991. This 1 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 512 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Brlef By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 5 of 10 recapitulation was apparently extr cted from the time records comprising Exhibit and a total was calculated. However, this purported summary does not stop at that point. Under a heading entitled it also sets firth the extra?record "facts" that: counsel for Donald Trumpiattended the deposition; counsel for Donald Trump conductedfcross-examination at the deposition; and (3) the McGahn attorney did not enter an appearance of record at the deposition. These "facts" are wholly without support within Exhibit P?l the document purportedly summarized. Nor do these ?facts" find any support on the record as a whole. Thus. these "facts" have no place in a ?Summary." C. The Purported "Summaries? Do Not Fairly Represent The Underlyinq Writings. It is well settled that a summary must fairly represent the writings underlying it. 594 F.2d at 553 ("the summary. . .must be accurate, authentic and properly introduced. . united States v. Drougas, 748 F.2d 8. 25 (lst Cir. 1984) ("care must be taken to insure that summaries accurately reflect the contents of the underlying documents. . The inquiry as to whether a summary "fairly represents" the_ underlying writings does not end there. The case of Davis a Cox v. The Summa 751 F.2d 15 7 (9th Cir. 1984), is particularly analogous to the pres nt case. In v? . the defendant sought to introduce summaries it-h prepared of the plaintiff's attOrney time records in an attemp Ito show_that the plaintiff's bills exceeded the value of legal ervices the plaintiff provided. The trial judge excluded the exhib'ts, finding that the defendant did not make the summaries or the nderlying documents available to Case 92-11188-JHW .DQC 512 Filed 05/18/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Brief By Arthur .J. Abramowntz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 6 of 10 the plaintiff until just before tr'al. The trial judge also found that at least one of the defendant's compilations was not a summary under Fed. R. Evid. 1006 because i did not "fairly represent" the underlying documents. "It only summarized those documents that, according to Summa's determination, 'dealt' with the indemnification issue." 751 F.2d at 1516. In the present case, Trump's purported ?summaries" do not fairly represent McGahn's time records. Cites to McGahn's time entries are taken out of context. The purported "summaries" state and restate the same entries in a number of different formats, thereby making the billings seem bigger than they actually were. Like the summaries offered in the anis case, in the present case, the purported "summaries? make determinations as to what time records are allocable to what particular tasks. Similarly, as in the aegis case, Trump proferred the purported "summaries" on the eve trial without specifically indicating the source for each summary. Therefore, this Court should reach the same conclusion as the court in the anis case did, and exclude the purported "summaries? on the bases: (1) the purported "summaries" do not "fairly represent" McGahn's billings and (2) the purported "summaries" were presented on the eve of trial, denying McGahn the opportunity to verify the accuracy and completeness of the erported ?summaries?. D. The Purported "Summadies" Are Argument, Not Evidence. In united States v, 556!F.2d 1179, 1183?84, n.12 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. den. 434 0.8. 862 (1977), the United States Court I of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ndted that "because summaries are elevated under Rule 1006 to the poJition of evidence care must be -5.. i Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 512 Filed 05/18/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Brief By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 7 of 10 'taken to omit argumentative matter in their preparation less [the finder of fact] believe that such matter is itself evidence of the assertion it makes." Similarly, in v. united States, 226 F.2d 9, 17 (5th Cir. 1955), the United States Court of Appeals fer the Fifth Circuit criticized the inclusion of summaries containing "impressive, conclusory captions." Ping v, gnited States, 407 F.2d.157, 160 (8th Cir. 1969) (noting the threat that "such unsworn, conclusory verbiage [may be taken] as authentic, primary proof?). In the present case, Trump's purported ?summaries" are nothing short of argument. The so?called "summaries" that appear on close. to every page of the Preparation for Deposition and Hearing Summary contain precisely the type of conclusory, argumentative statements criticized by these cases. Moreover, the totaling and retotaling of McGahn's time records is an argumentative exercise which should be reserved for closing argument, not placed in the record as evidence. E. The Purported ?Summaties? Should Be Excluded Because Creating Foundations For These Documents Would Turn Trump's Lawyers Into Witnesses. The proponent of a summary has the burden of laying a proper foundation for its admission. UnitEQ States v, ?ghnson, supra, 594 P.2d at 1254. Such a foundation includes not only testimony, but making "the person who prepared thei[summaries] . . .available for cross- examination. United States L. ann, 948 F.2d 145, 159 (5th Cir. 1991). At the same time, New Lersey Rule of Professional Conduct, RPC 3. 7 makes clear the ieroPriety of a lawyer' 5 serving as a witness in the same case in he will serve as an advocate. Case 92- 11188- JHW Doc 512 Filed 05/18/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: O3 Desc . Brief By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 8 of 10 In the present case, six of the seven purported "summaries" indicate that they are prepared by 'Schwartz, Tobia Stanziale", attorneys for Trump. Thus, in orde to establish a foundation for the purported "summaries", Trump's lawyers would have to testify and subject themselves to crossnexamination in the same case where they are acting as advocates. The obvious impropriety of their doing so prevents Trump from laying the necessary foundation for the purported "summaries." II. THE PURPORTED FAIL UNDER THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE. IFed. R. Evid. 1002 provides: To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these Rules or by Act of Congress. The Best Evidence Rule has been held to apply to summaries. United States v. Johnson, 594 F.2d at 1255. In the present case, the Best Evidence Rule precludes the admission of the purported "summaries." This Court already has in the record before it the best evidence of McGahn's time records the time records themselves. Given that the summaries are in fact being offered for the truth of what is contained in the time 3 records, the time records not the summaries are the best evidence of the contents of the time records. For this reason, the summaries should be excluded. 3 THE PURPORTED UNDER A FED. R. EVID. 403 ANALYSIS. Fed. R. Evid. 403 provides: Although relevant, ev-dence may be excluded if its probative value is ubstantially outweighed by the danger unfair prejudice, Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 512 Filed 05/18l93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 "Desc .Brief By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Fries and Miller In Support Page 9 of 10 confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. Wright graha_, Eederal Practice and Procedure: Evidence (West 1978) ??5211?5224 contains an extensive discussion of the balancing test under the Exclusionary Rule, Fed. R. Evid. 403. That analysis will not be repeated at length in the present brief. However, a discriminating review of the purported "summaries" reveals that they have little probative value and their inclusion in evidence is nothing more than a waste of time and the needless presentation of cumulative evidence. Trump's transparent intention in proferring the purported "summaries" is to use them to support his allegations that McGahn's attorneys fees and expenses were excessive. Even McGahn's own time records are not direct evidence as to the element issue of reasonableness or unreasonableness. Instead, McGahn's time records are circumstantial evidence of the work actually performed and the necessity thereof. The purported ?summaries" are therefore circumstantial evidence of circumstantial evidence. The purported "summaries" are therefore of little probative value. On the other side of the balancing test, the purported "summaries'" slight probative valueiis greatly outweighed by the waste of time that their admission ind authentication would require. Better evidence is available and is already of record in the form of Exhibit P?l. In addition, the purported "summaries" embody the needless presentation of cumulative evidence} There can be no doubt that the purported "summaries? are cumulativi because the records themselves . Case Doc 512 Filed 05/18/93 Entered 05/17/16 142003 so . . .Brlef By Arthur J. Abramowitz for Creditor McGahn Friss and Miller In Support Pagea 10 of 10 are already in evidence. Nor can there be any doubt that the presentation of the purported "summaries" would be needless given that they go to the very same issue to which the records themselves go. Thus. the purported "summaries" should be excluded under Fed. R..Evid- 403. QONQLUSIOE For the foregoing reasons. this Court should exclude the purported "summaries" from the record because they are not summaries at all and because they are argumentative. In addition. this Court should exclude the purported "summaries" because their admission would be contrary to the Best Evidence Rule and the Exclusionary Rule. Respectfully submitted. DAVIS. By: ??za?at. REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. Arthur J. Abfamowitz Dean C. Waldt Dated: May 18. 1993 0954T ?10 I - 16 14:20:03 Doss . - - - 00 13 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17! Sti'pu E?l FDor 059th Trump Plaza Assomates and Counsel For Page 1 of 9 PELELJ 2 a 1993. ARTHUR J. ABRAMOWITZ. ESQUIRE (+3724) 1 DAVIS, ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. I 499 Cooper Landing Road '3 mumml. P.0. Box 5459 .. Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 i (609) 667-6000 1 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Mihler u. -.-. :r-v ..- . UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT or NEW JERSEY In-Re: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et al,? 92~11190 (JW) Debtors. F: Hearing Date: SETTLEMENT This Stipulation of Settlement ("Stipulation") is entered into by and between Trump Plaza Associates, Debtor in the above referenced chapter 11 case ("Debtor") and MCGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn"), McGahn Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr. (collectively "Defendants?), by and through their respective undersigned counsel, subject to the entry of an order by the Court approving this Stipulation, under the terms and conditions set forth hereinbelow, as follows: I 1. On or about April 16, 1992, McGahn filed a Proof of Claim in the amount of $793,215.22. On or about August 18, 1992, McGahn filed an Amended Proof of Claim in the amount of $813,191.63 (collectively the "C1aim"). 2. On or about June 25, 1992, the Debtor filed an omnibus- Motion seeking to disallow, reduce or expunge certain claims (the :13. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 2 of 9 "Motion"). Among the claims which Debtor sought to reduce and/or expunge was the claim of the firm of McGahn. 3. McGahn's claim is based upon fees and expenses incurred on behalf of the Debtor by McGahn in providing legal services to the Debtor prior to the date Debtor filed its chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (the "Bankruptcy Court"). 4. On July 30, 1992, McGahn filed an objection to Debtor's Motion. 5. On or about February 5, 1993, Debtor initiated Adversary Proceeding No. 93?1022 (JW) (the "Adversary Proceeding") in the above referenced chapter 11 case against the Defendants seeking, inter alia, judgment against Defendants for compensatory and punitive damages. 6. On or about March 5, 1993, the Defendants filed an answer in the Adversary Proceeding. 7. Without conceding liability each one to the other, Debtor and Defendants wish to settle and resolve all claims between them related to the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding. 8. Debtor and Defendants, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration, and intending to be legally bound hereby, subject to the approval of the Banhruptcy Court, agree as follows: A. Debtor and Defendants agree and stipulate to the entry of an Order by the Bankruptcy Cour% in the form attached hereto as Exhibit approving this Stipulation and making it binding on Debtor, Defendants and all other rsons and parties in interest . Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/1711 14:20:03 Des Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Cognsel For Page 3 0f 9 including but not limited to all petsons and entities claiming under, by or through either Debtor Tr Defendants. Debtor and Defendants agree that Debtor shall pay to McGahn the sum of FIVE HUNDRED THDUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) (the "Settlement Funds") in settlement of both the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding, and in full satisfaction for all legal services performed by McGahn on behalf of the Debtor through the date hereof, to be paid pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. C. At or before 2:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on Friday, May 21, 1993, Debtor shall hand deliver to McGahn at 1600 Atlantic Avenue, Longport, New Jersey Debtor's check in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($350,000) . Debtor shall be obligated to make this payment on May 21, 1993 as agreed on the record before the Bankruptcy Court regardless of whether the Bankruptcy Court has entered the Order approving this Stipulation by such date. If, for any reason, the Bankruptcy Court does not approve this Stipulation, the payment referred to in this subparagraph shall be returned to the Debtor. D. The remainder of the Settlement Funds, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS shall be paid by the Debtor to McGahn on or before the end of business 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time) on December 7, 1993. 9. If Debtor fails to make anther of the payments referred to hereinabove on or before the dates and times that such payments are required under the terms of this Stipulation, McGahn may file a Certification with the Bankruptcy Court indicating the amount of such payment(s) which have not been received and declaring a default under the terms of this Stipulation. Case 92- -11188- -.JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05117716 14: 20: O3 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 4 of 9 10. Upon the filing of such a dertification by McGahn with the Bankruptcy Court, Debtor hereby consents to the entry of a judgment against it in the Bankruptcy Court for the outstanding unpaid amount of the Settlement Funds as of the date of the filing of said Certification, as set forth therein? 11. If a consent judgment is entered against Debtor upon Debtor's default under this Stipulation, Debtor hereby waives any and all defenses now existing or hereafter arising with respect to such judgment and/or McGahn's execution upon such judgment and, furthermore, Debtor expressly consents to McGahn' execution with reapect to such judgment on Debtor's assets, wherever located, by any means permitted by law. Debtor specifically and irrevocably waives any and all right to contest, seek to open, or otherwise challenge the entry of and execution upon a judgment entered by McGahn in accordance with the terms of this Stipulation. 12. Upon execution of this Stipulation, the Claim shall be deemed compromised and settled for the sum of $500,000 porsuant to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation, the Motion shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice and the Adversary Proceeding shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice. 13. Upon execution of this Stipulation, Debtor, for itself and its respective predecessors, succesfors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, directors, 0 ficers, employees, stockholders, attorneys, agents and assigns, here releases and forever discharges Defendants and their res1ective predecessors, successors, principals, partners, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demand actions, causes of action Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 5 of 9 and/or suits of any kind or nature Lhatsoever, whether now known or unknown, ariSing or in any way rela ed to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceed'ng, including, but not limited to, any and all claims which are or,cou1d have been asserted therein. 14. Contingent upon the'timely?receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn under the terms of this Stipulation, Defendants, for themselves and their predecessors, successors, principals, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns, hereby release and forever discharge Debtor and its respective predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, stockholders, partners, including but not limited to Donald J. Trump, limited partners, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions, causes of action and/or suits of any kind or nature whatsoever, whether now known or unknown, arising out of or in any way related to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceeding, including but not. limited to any and all claims which are or could have been asserted therein. Defendants' release of Debtor contained in this Paragraph 13 is expressly contingent upon the timely receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. If the Settlement Funds are not timely received by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation, Defendanfs' release of Debtor contained herein shall be null and void ab in tip, as if this Stipulation had never been executed. 15. The parties hereto agree, subject to the approval of the I Bankruptcy Court, that no notice of this Stipulation to creditors or other parties in interest of the Debtor is required. -5- Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For? Page 6 of 9 16. This Stipulation constitut the entire agreement between the parties hereto; and no subseque t.a1teration, amendment, change or addition to the Stipulation shal be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to a writing executed by the parties hereto and approved by the Bankruptcy Court. 17. This Stipulation may be executed in one or more counterparts, which, taken together, shall constitute one in the same original Stipulation. SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE Counsel for Trump Plaza Associates By: Charles A. Stanziale, Esquire DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ. P.C. Counsel for McGahn, Fries Miller: McGahn.& Fries and Patrick T. Jr. By:- ar/A l7l3R.l a 5 2 a 1:35 o?i?ire%?wyj ?ofjc 5i? EhF?ed 05126193 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 0956' - ?3 3 St?t'??dla?'on ounsel Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 7 of 9 3' 16. This stipulation constitutee the-entire agreement between the partiee.hereto, and no eubeequen? altetetion, omendmenb,=chan99 or addition to the Stipulation shallghe binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to a writing hr the parties and approved by the Bankruptcy Court? 17:- Thie stipulation may be ?actuated in one or. more counterparte, wnioh, taken together,oehali constitute one in the same Oniqinal Stipulation. 17133.1 5cm" 'rz. men a summon coun. e1 to: Trump. P152. Q-arlea A. Sta RBBERKEHNY ABRAHDWITZ, P.C. isle. Esquire . oounizal for. McGahn, Fries Emil-lot: Rose a Fries and Pntrick T. Rithur J. ?bzamowitz, Beguire Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 8 of 9 ARTHUR J. ABRAMOWITZ, ESQUIRE (AA3724) DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, 9.0. 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667-6000 - Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et'al; 92?11190 (JW) Debtors. Hearing Date: ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT STIPQLATION AND NOW, this day of May, 1993, upon consideration of the Stipulation of Settlement (the fStipulation") entered into between Debtor and McGahn, Friss Miller McGahn Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr., Esquire (collectively "Defendants"), in the above-captioned case, and for geod cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows: 1. The Stipulation is hereby APPROVED and the terms thereof are forthwith effective as an ordergof this Court. 2. All the terms and provisiohs of the Stipulation are binding upon the Debtor and Defendants and all other persons and parties in interest, including but not limited to all persons claiming under, by or through either Debtor or Defendants. 3. Upon default of the Debtor under the terms of the Stipulation, McGahn may enter judgment against Debtor in this Court I 5w . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 513 Filed 05/20l93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stlpulatlon Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 9 of 9 for the unpaid amount of the Settl ment Funds as set-forth in the Stipulation by filing a Certificat'on of Default and a copy of this Order with the Clerk, United Statei Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, Camden Vicinage, and the Clerk is hereby ordered to reinstate this matter, if required, and enter such judgment of record upon receipt o?'the same. 4. Upon entry of such judgment, McGahn may proceed to execute on such judgment by any means permitted by law, and Debtor shall be deemed to have waived any objections to the entry of such judgment and to any execution thereon. 5. Effective upon the date 0E this order, the Motion filed by Debtor with respect to the expungement of McGahn's claim in this chapter 11 case is dismissed with prejudice and the Adversary Proceeding No. 93?1022 (JW), as described in the Stipulation, is also dismissed With prejudice. Judith H. Wizmur, Judge wnited States Bankruptcy Court A copy of this Order to be sent to: DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ. P.C. Attention: Dean C. Waldt, Esquire 499 Cooper Landing Road P.O. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, N.J. 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller, McGahn a Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr., Esq. 1713R.7 .. I Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 514. Filed 05l20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc 'ZOrder Approving [513-1] StipulationtOf Settlement. (Jpp) 05/24/93] Page 1 of 4 uu-u- Cbiu m-q-nnm. ISLERR rum'c 0'993i ARTHUR J. ABRAMOWITZ, ESQUIRE (AAJ724) .r DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P. c. In? 16? 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: .Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) Debtors. Hearing Date: ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT STIPULATION AND NOW, this ERCD day of-May, 1993, upon consideration of the Stipulation of Settlement (the "Stipulation") entered into between Debtor and McGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn"), McGahn Fries and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr., Esquire (collectively "Defendants"), in the above?captioned case, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows: 1. The Stipulation is hereby APPROVED and the terms thereof are forthwith effective as an order of this Court. 2. All the terms and provisions of the Stipulation are binding upon the Debtor and Defendants and all other persons and parties in interest, including but not limite to all persons claiming under, by or through either Debtor or Def ndants. 3. Upon default of the Debtor under the terms of the 1 . Stipulation, McGahn may enter judgment against Debtor in this Court 31+. '1 Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 514' Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 __Order Approving [5134] StipulationiOf Settlement. (Jpp) 05/24/93] Page 2 of 4 f? for the unpaid amount of the Settiement Funds as set forth in the Stipulation by filing a Certiticaiion of Default and a copy o? this Order with the Clerk, United Statls Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, Camden Vicinage, and the Clerk is hereby ordered to reinstate this matter, if required, and enter such judgment of record upon receipt oE the same. 4. Upon entry of such judgment, McGahn may proceed to execute on such judgment by any means permitted by law, and Debtor shall be deemed to have waived any objections to the entry of such judgment and to any execution thereon. 5. Effective upon the date of this Order, the Motion filed by Debtor with respect to the expungement of McGahn's claim in this chapter 11 case is dismissed with prejudice and the-Adversary Proceeding No. 93?1023 (JW), as 66$cribed in the Stipulation, is also dismissed with prejudice. garage/l 5? ith H. mur, Judge _nited St es Bankruptcy Court A copy of this Order z%%9 to be sent to: DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. Attention: Dean C. Waldt, ESquire 499 Cooper Landing Road . P.O. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, N.J. 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Mill r, McGahn Fries and Patrick T. McG-hn, Jr., Esq. 1713R.7 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 514 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Order Approving [513:1] Stipulation Of Settlement. (Jpp) 05/24/93] Page 3 of 4 . r?u DAVIS, REBERKENNY 8c A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION WILLIAM o. HOGAN 499 COOPER LANDING ROAD EDWARD A. KONDRACKI ARTHUR a. ABRAMOWITZ BOX NO. [5459 FM, KENNETH D. ROTH 6. CHERRY HILL. 609.357.74.14 WILLIAM o. LAVERY. UR. DAVID R. QBERLANDER {509) 6673-1500 G. CONSOLE or COUNSEL HARRY A. . DEAN c. WALDT WILLIAM c. DAVIS HOWARD s. MENDELSDN . . ?Wuhmu??mm WILLA LIP KEITH WALDMAN 3 Kl ROBERT J. MALLOY . 3 I i .1. . CLARENCE R. REBERKENNY new me newJ?Iure .1 .. DAVID M. BRENT Cm?k usaI-IssaI THOMAS P. THACKSTON {m BAR ., - VIA HAND DELIVERY is! 1993 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur i . United States Bankruptcy Court 15 N. 7th Street Camden, NJ 08102 Re: In re Trump Plaza. Associates, et a1. Dear Judge Wizmur:- Pursuant to the terms of the settlement between the Debtor and the firm of McGahn, Fries Miller placed on the record before Your Honor on May 18, 1993, I am enclosing a Stipulation of Settlement and form of Order Approving Settlement Stipulation for consideratiOn by the Court. The Stipulation has been signed in counterparts on behalf of counsel for each party. While the siganture of Debtor's counsel attached to the enclosed Stipulation is a facsimile, the original is being transmitted by Debtor's counsel to the undersigned by overnight delivery and will be forwarded to the Court for filing immediately upon receipt. As indicated on the record on.May 18, it is imperative that the Order Approving Settlemeht Stipulation be entered as soon as possible to facilitate the delivery of the first settlement payment before 2:00 p;n. on Friday, May 21, 1993. Accordingly, if the Stipulati?n and Order is acceptable to the Court, it is respectfully -equested that our messenger be provided with a conformed copy of the Order as approved so that it may be returned to this office and transmitted to Debtor's counsel by facsimile. Case Doc 514 Filed 05/20/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Order Approving [513-1] Stipulation (jpp) 05/24/93] Page 4 of 4 DAVIS, REBERKENNY 8c ABRAMOWITZ the Court for its courtesy in thi matter If Your Honor has any questions or requires any hing further, I am available Debtor's counsel joins me in gxpressing its thanks to at the convenience of the Court. Respectfully submitted, DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. 6202/ By Dean C. Waldt Encl. cc: Steven C. Greene, Esq. (via facsimile) Counsel for the Debtor 1 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 515 [Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Dear: Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 1 of 7 I o. HOGAN Law OFFICES 1 Davis, 8c coua raE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION q, 499 COOPER LANDING ROAD sDwARp A. KonpRAoI-u ARTHUR a. KENNETH D. ROTH IRA O. MEGDAL WILLIAM o. LAVERY. QR. DAVID R. OBERLANDER RAYHOND a. CONSOLE HARRY A. O. WALDT Home 5. KEITH WALDMAN ROBERT o. HALLOY TERRI JANE DAVID M. BRENT THOMAS P. [?89 ONLYI VIA Ham) DELIVERY Clerk Box NO. 5459 HILL, NJ. May 21, 1993 United States Bankruptcy Court 15 N. 7th Street Camden, NJ 08102 Re: In re Trump Plaza Aschiates, et al. {?321 1? '3 MW a 609667-7434 .. o-r' .r ngEth .. - ?l OF COUNSEL WILLIAM c. DAVIS LIPKIN CLARENCE P. REBERKENNY neat-less! Case Nos. and 92?11190taw) TO THE CLERK: Please accept for'filing in the above?referenced chapter 11 case the original and one copy of the enclosed Stipulation of Settlement. Judge Wizmur entered an Order approving the Stipulation of Settlement on May'20, 1993 based upon a facsimile signature. Pursuant to instructions from the Court, we are enclosing the original Stipulation of Settlement for filing. Please file-stamp the enclosed additional copy of the Stipulation of Settlement and return the same to our messenger. Thank you for your courtesy. If you have any questions concerning the above or require anything further, please call me at your convenience. Sincerely, DAVIS, REBERKENNY BRAMOWITZ, By: Dean C. Waldt PIC. Encl. i cc: The Honorable Judith H. Wiz?ur (w/o encl.) TLC. I {,aCase Dog 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Emulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 2 of 7 .GTGGUET 15.31..) i 3 95 l?ll'ElE . ARTHUR J. (AA3724) DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMQWITZ, P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller a "All"? . n. 0-. f' 11.1: :1 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 (JW) TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) 'Debtors. Hearing Date: This Stipulation of Settlement ("Stipulation") is entered into by and between Trump Plaza Associates, Debtor in the above referenced chapter 11 case ("Dethr") and McGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn"), McGahn Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr. (collectively "Defendants?), by and through their respective undersigned counsel, subject to the entry of an order by the Court approving this Stipulation, under the terms and conditions set forth hereinbelow, as follows: 1. On or about April 16, 19%2, McGahn filed a Proof of Claim in the amount of $793,215.22. On?or about August 18, 1992, McGahn filed an Amended Proof of Claim in the amount of $813,191.63 (collectively the "C1aim"). 2. On or about June 25, 199%, the Debtor filed an omnibus Motion seeking to disallow, reduce or expunge certain claims (the . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 515 Filed Entered 05/17/16 14:20: 3 esc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel DPage 3 of 7 1 "Motion"). Among the claims which Debtor Sought to reduce and/or expunge was the claim of the firm of McGahn. 3. McGahnfs claim is based upon fees and expenses incurred on behalf of the Debtor by McGahn in providing legal services to the Debtor prior to the date Debtor filed its chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (the "Bankruptcy Court"). 4. On July 30, 1992, McGahn filed an objection to Debtor's Motion. 5. On or about February 5, 1993, Debtor initiated Adversary Proceeding No. 93?1022 (JW) (the "Adversary Proceeding") in the above referenced chapter 11 case against the Defendants seeking, inter a1;a, judgment against Defendants for compensatory and punitive damages. 6. On or about March 5, 1993, the Defendants filed an answer in the Adversary Proceeding. 7. Without conceding liability each one to the other, Debtor and Defendants wish to settle and resolve all claims between them related to the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding.' 8. Debtor and Defendants, in consideration of the mutual' promises and covenants set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration, and intending to be legally bound hereby, subject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court, agree as follows: A. Debtor and Defendants agree and stipulate to the entry of an Order by the Bankruptcy Court in the form attached hereto as Exhibit approving this Stipulation and making it binding on Debtor, Defendants and all other persons and parties in interest ., Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 401? 7 lincluding but not limited to all persons and entities claiming under, by or through either Debtor or Defendants. B. Debtor and Defendant; agree that Debtor shall pay to MCGahn the sum of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) (the "Settlement Funds") in settlement of both the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding, and in full satisfaction for all legal services performed by McGahn on behalf of the Debtor through the date hereof, to be paid pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. C. At or before 2:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on Friday, May 21, 1993, Debtor shall hand deliver to McGahn at 1600 Atlantic Avenue, Longport, New Jersey Debtor's check in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS Debtor shall be obligated to make this payment on May 21, 1993 as agreed on the record before the Bankruptcy Court regardless of whether the Bankruptcy Court has entered the Order approving this Stipulation by such date. If, for any reason, the Bankruptcy Court does not approve this Stipulation, the payment referred to in this subparagraph shall be returned to the Debtor. D. The remainder of the Settlement Funds, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($150 000), Shall be paid by the Debtor to McGahn on or before the end of business 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time) on December 7, 1993. 9. If Debtor fails to make either of the payments referred to hereinabove on or before the datesiand times that such payments are required under the terms of this Slipulation, McGahn may file a' Certification with the Bankruptcy Court indicating the amount of such payment(s) which have not been received and declaring a default under the terms of this Stipulation. ?Sf ge 5 of 7 10.. Upon the filing of such a Certification by McGahn with the Bankruptcy Court, Debtor hereby consents to the entry of a judgment against it in the Bankruptcy Courtlfor the outstanding unpaid amount of the Settlement Funds as of the date of the filing of said Certification, as set forth therein. 11. If a consent judgment is entered against Debtor upon Debtor's default under this Stipulation, Debtor hereby waives any and all defenses now existing or hdreafter arising with respect to such judgment and/or McGahn's ehecdtion upon such judgment and, furthermore, Debtor expressly conants to McGahn's execution with respect to such judgment on Debtor's assets, wherever located, by any means permitted by law. Debtor specifically and irrevocably waives any and all right to contest, seek to open, or otherwise. challenge the entry of and execution upon a judgment entered by McGahn in accordance with the terms of this Stipulation. 12. Upon execution of this Stipulation, the Claim shall be deemed compromised and settled for the sum of $500,000 pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation, the Motion shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice and the Adversary Proceeding shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice. 13. Upon execution of this Stipulation, Debtor, for itself and its respective predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, directors, dfficers, employees, stockholders, attorneys, agents and assigns, hereby releases and forever discharges Defendants and their respective predecessors, successors, principals, partners, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions, causes of action . CIase 92-11188-JHW Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Deso Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 6 of 7 . and/or suits of any kind or nature whatsoever, whether now known or unknown, arising or in any way rela ed to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceedpng, including, but not limited to, any and all claims which are or could have been asserted therein. 14. Contingent upon the timely receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn under the terms of this Stipulation, Defendants, for themselves and their predecessors, successors, principals, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns, hereby release and forever discharge Debtor and its respective predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, Effiliates, directors, officers, stockholders, partners, including but not limited to Donald J. Trump, limited partners, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions, causes of action and/or suits of any kind or nature whatsoever, whether now known or unknown, arising out of or in any way related to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceeding, including but not limited to any and all claims which are or could have been asserted therein. Defendants' release of Debtor contained in this Paragraph 13 is-expressly contingent upon the timely receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. If the Settlement Funds are not timely received by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation, Defendants' release of Debtor contained herein shall be null and void ab initio, as if this Stipulation had never been executed. 15. The parties hereto agree,lsubject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court, that no notice 0% this Stipulation to creditors or other parties in interest of the Debtor is required. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 1420' . . .03 .Stlpulatlon Sell/{ween Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For [Sage 7 of 7 16. This Stipulation constitut the entire agreement between the parties hereto. and no subsequejt alteration, amendment, change or addition to the Stipulation shal be binding upon the parties 5 hereto unless reduced to a-writing executed by the parties hereto and approved by the Bankruptcy Court. 17. This Stipulation may be executed in one or more counterparts, which, taken?together, shall constitute one in the same original Stipulation. TOBIA STANZIALE . Counsel for Trump Plaza ociates By: Eda-??8 Charles A. Stanziale, Esquire DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. Counsel for McGahn, Friss a Miller; McGahn Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr. Afth?l J. Abramowyya, Esquire 1713R.l Dated: May 20, 1993 Case 92-11188-JHW Dog: 516 Filed 05/24/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Desc Hearing Held Re: [494?1] MOIIOH For Leave To Ftle A Late Proof Of Claim by A?nth Page 1 of 1 United States Bankruptcy Court Courtroom 1; 2nd Floor 15 North 7th Street Camden, New Jer?eY 08102?1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmur MINUTE Docket 92-11188 Debtor: Trump P?aza Associates Adversary Docket 00?00000 Matter: Motion to File Late Proof of Claim Filed on: 04/29/93 Creditor: Richard Carlucci for Anthony Ric?a Other Appearanoes: Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party Note: Granted Order Denied sea Order Withdrawn COTBS Adjourned to Other MISCELLANEOUS: Adjourned Dates: Priority: Chapter: at $19 ease Doc 518 Filed 05/28/93 Entered 05/1711 14-2004 . . . . . . . Hearing (Minute Sheet filed) Re: [486-1] Motion For Permission To Fileg Proof Pagesl 0f 1 United States Bankruptcy Court Courtroom 1: 2nd Floor 15 North 7th Street Camden, New Jer?ey 98102?1104 Honorable Judith H. Wizmor MINUTE 05/28/93 1:06 Docket 92-11188 Debtor: Trump Plaza Associates Adversary Docket 00-00000 Matter: Motion to File Proof of Claim Out of Time Filed on: 04/12/93 Creditor: Raymond Gill for Magdalena Ron .Other Appearances: Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney for Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attorneys for Creditors Attorney for Moving Party bJ 1] Note: Granted Order Denied Order . Withdrawn COTBS Adjourned to 51*f%7 at 1L Other .- A, "f{4 ,5 . MISCELLANEOUS: ?1 7 LWW- A - - ?3 Adjourned Dates: 05/10/93 05/17/93 Priority: Chapter: gig. .d?J H. \scans\519. SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE A Professional Association 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, New Jersey 07042 (201) 746- 6000 C0- Counsel ?qr Debtors By: BEN H. BECKER In re: TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, TRUMP PLAZA FUNDING, INC., TRUMP BOARDWALK REALTY CORPORATION, Debtors. I, LINDA s. CHELIUS. of fu I I of affidavit as follows: I am a legal Stanziale with offices locate? New Jersey 07042. That I am, than 18 years of age. That on the 27th day of May, United States Mail, the below the attached service list: 1. Application for Entry 2. Proposed form of Order. I certify under penalty of and correct. DATED: 1993 secretaryiiemployed by Schwartz, and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, Case 92 11188 JHW DOC 519 06/01/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 04 D980 Page].of2 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT or NEW JERSEY Case Nos: 92-11188 Jw 92~11189 Jw 92?11190 JW CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE 11 age, does hereby certify in lieu Tobia and at: 22 Crestmont Road, Montclair, more 1993 I served via First Class listed documents to all parties on 3. I I .- of Final Decreegua, Lam/1t, s. CHELIUS May 27, Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 519 Fil -. ed 06/01/93 Entered 05/17 1 Page 2 of2 I 6 14.20.04 Desc PLAZA POST CONFIRMATIGN SERVICE LIST Allen B. Dubroff, Esq. Andrew Tenzer, Esq. Astor, Weiss Newman Willkie, Farr Gallagher The Bellevue 6th floor One Citicorp Center Broad St. at Walnut 153 East 53rd Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 New York. NY 10022?4669 Of?ice of the Pat Wild, Esq. United States Trustee General Counsel Qne Newark Center, Suite 2100 Trump Plaza Hotel Casino Newark, NJ 07102 Mississippi Ave. Boardwalk Atlantic City, NJ 08401. Gary Kruse, Esq. Bruce R. Zirinsky, Esq. and McCarter English Norman Rosenbaum, Esq. Gateway Four Weil Gotshal Manges 100 Mulberry Street 767 Fifth Ave Newark, NJ 07101 New York, NY 10153 Atty./Fidelity Capital Inoeme Stephen B. MoNally, Esq. Stephanie Seligman, Esq. Sills, Cummis, Zuckerman, Radin, Wachtel, Lipton, Rosen Katz Tischman, Epstein Gross, P.A. i 299 Park Avenue One River?ront Plaza 5 New York, NY 10171 Newark, NJ 07102?5400 ?Case . .. . . erer Granting [494:1] MOUOFI For Leave To Flle A Late Ff?roof Of Claim Page 1 of 2 Consentt i DOG 521 Filed 06/04/93 Entered 95/17/15 14:20:04 Desc MAIRONE, BIEL, ZLOTNICK, FEINBERG, GRIFFITH STANGER, P.A. 3201 ATLANTIC AVENUE - ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 08401 (609) 344-1173 Attorneys for Anthony J. Ricoa UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT In Re: FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, CASE NO. 92?11133 JW at 611., Debtors. QQNSENT ORDER ALLOWING ANTHONY J. RICCA TO FILE PROOF AND To SE APDED TO TEE CLAIMANT LIST AND NOW, To WIT, this if day of 1993, by consent of the parties and upon noti the United states Trustee in accordance with Federal Rule of nkruptcy Procedure 7041, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion of Anthony J. Ricca to file a late Proof of Claim and to added to the claimant list is hereby granted. HQ RAELE JUDI. - WIZMUR TED COURT E253 E?i? an .I 1. I, JAMES A. WALDRON, CUR-s: JUN 0 4: 1993 U. 5. BANKRUPTCY 3 ,N.l ?Case Consent Order Granting [494- 1] Motion For Leave To File A Late Proof Of Claim Page 2 of 2 _l 92-11188-JHW DOC 521 Filed 06/04/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20' Dose The undersigned consent to the entry of this Order. MAIRONE, ZLOTNICK, FEINBERG, GRIFFITH STANGER, P.A. ATTORNEYS FOR ANTHONY J. RICCA 404;.? m) YRiqhard A. CarluCol, Eequire SCHWARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE ATTORNEYS FOR DEBTOR ,4 .4 IBY: Ben H. Bedker, Esquire CH I Case 92-11188-JHW pop 520 Filed 06/09/93 Entered 05l17/16 14:20:04 Desc Ser?fioate Of Service By Ber] I-I. Becker fcjr?Debt?or Trump Plaza Associates Of J?u Page 1 of 2 an" SCHWARTZ, STANZIALE IWLED A Professional Association warn. 22 Crestmont Road - Montclair, New gersey Q7942 - 1 (201) 746?6000 . CQ'Coun591 for Debtors usinamaenmcmusr By: BEN H. EECKER UNITED STA ES BANKRUPTCY COURT In re: FOR THE DI TRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES. Case Nos: 92?11188 JW TRUMP PLAZA FUNDING. INC., 92~11189 JW TRUMP BOARDWALK REALTY 92?11190 Jw CORPORATION, . CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE Debtors. I. LINDA S. CHELIUS, of full age. does hereby certify in lieu of affidavit as follows: I am a legal secretary employed by Schwartz, Tobie and Stanziale with offices located 5W: 22 Crestmont Road, Montclair, New Jersey @7942. That I am, and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, more than 18 years of age. That on the 7th day of June, 1993 I served via First Class United States Mail a copy of Judge Wizmur's letter regarding the Application for a Final Decree in the above captioned matter to all parties on the annexed service list. I certify under penalty oprerjury that the foregoing is true and correct. I I I ., LINDA s. CHELIUS DATED: June 7, 1993 Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 520 Filed 06/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Desc ?Cer??cate Of Service By Ben H. Becker for Debtor Trump Plaza Assomates Of JU Page 2 of 2 TRUMP PLAZA POST CONFIRMATKON SERVICE LIST Allen B. Dubroff, Esq. Astor, Weiss Newman The Bellevue 6th floor Broad St. at Walnut Philadelphia, PA 19102 Office of the United States Trustee One Newark Center, Suite 2100 Newark, NJ 07102 Gary Kruse, Esq. McCarter a English Gateway Four 100 Mulberry Street Newark, NJ 07101 Stephen B. McNally, Esq. Sills, Cummis, Zuckerman, Radin, Tischman, Epstein Gross, P.A. One Riverfront Plaza Newark, NJ 07102?5400 2577N Andrew Tenzer, Esq. Willkie, Farr Gallagher One Citicorp Center 153 East 53rd Street New York. NY 10022?4669 Pat Wild, Esq. General Counsel Trump Plaza Hotel Casino Mississippi Ave. Boardwalk Atlantic City, NJ 08401. Bruce R. Zirinsky, Esq. and Norman Rosenbaum, Esq. Weil Gotshal Manges 767 Fifth Ave New York, NY 10153 Atty./Fide1ity Capital Income Stephanie Seligman, Esq. Wachtel, Lipton, Rosen a Katz 299 Park Avenue New York, NY 10171 (Jase 92-11188-JHW Dec 522 Filed 06/22/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Desc Hearing Held Re: [486-1] Motlon For Permission To File A Proof Of Claim Out Of Page'l of 1 United SLatos Bankrupioy'Uourt a 1, 2nd FLoor l?-Noxth Street Camden, New erwuy 08l02~ll04 Honorable Judiih H. Wizmur MINUTE ooxzzgog non Docket 92v1118u nohtor: rromp Plane AgsuoiaLes A?voreary Docket 00*00000 Matter: Motion to File Proof of Claim not of Time Filed on: 04/12/93 Creditor: Raymond Gill for Magdalena Ron (Dialiczif? Trustee Attorney for Trustee Attorney f0r Debtor Attorney for Creditors Committee U.S. Trustee Attornoye for Creditors Attorney for MDVilig Part iQuWw_ lote: ?ttiilr?an' Denied [m Order Withdrawn [mwm] COTBS Adjourned to at Other . ..H I .. if .f (it-M . . ?[25 SQ: HUI IS 3 IBM-mey ?lTn-x A37- Adjourned Dutee: 03/10/93 Uh;i3xia ?uuxke/QB Priori ty: (Jim p? [163.1 . . Case Doc 527 Filed 97/092913 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 3 Motion By Creditor Nancy Ma?cinnis To Enlarge Time To File Proof Of Claim and To of 2 i LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD EASAMAN 1216 N.E. Central Avenue Seaside Park, New Jersey 08752 908 793 3080 . Attorneys for Plaintiff {zone/eww EDWARD anshunn (EB 4990) LUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY IN THE MATTER OF TRUMP anzn ASSOCIATES :Chapter 11 DEBTOR Case No. 33:11188 gaseh11189 NANCY MACINNIS, 4299?11190 Plaintiff, vs. Adversary No. TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES -NOTICE OF MOTION Defendant. TO TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, INC. AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Nancy MacInnis, through her attorney, Edward Basaman, Esquire Sifi, on 1993, at 10:00 o'clock in the forenoon move before the Honorable Judith H. Wismer, United States District Bankruptcy Judge, at the United States Bankruptcy Court at Camden, New Jersey, for an ORDER enlarging the time in which to file a Notice of Claim on behalf of Plaintiff, and for an ORDER allowing a civil action between the parties-to proceed in the United States District Court of New $17 . .. Case 92- -11188- JHW Dec; 527 Filed Entered 05117/16 14: 20: 05 Best: Motion By Creditor Nanny Macinnis To Enlarge Time To File Proof Qf Claim and To Page 2 of 2 gersey. The Motion will be made pursuant to Rule 9005 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The Motion will be based upon this Notice, Brief, and the within Affidavite and Certifications, all papers, pleading, and files herein, and such other argument and evidence as may be at or prior to the hearing. The Plaintiff requests oral argument on the Motion. JULY 8, 1993 Respectfully submitted, cad/we 4% Edward Bahaman, Esquire (EB 4990) Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 528 Affida . Filed 07/09/93 Entere - 0 ,vut In 3999ng 9f Te Enlarge Time T9 File? Pf??zgf?cllgi?woaw Pargeesg of 4 Fran h. ?nu; ill :Jd LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD BASAMAN 1216 N.E. Central Avenue Seaside Park, New Jersey 08752 908 793 3080 Attorneys for Plaintiff By: EDWARD an_ (EB 4990) EUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY IN THE MATTER OF TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES :Chapter 11 DEBTOR -Case No. ?11188 . 90311189 MACINNES, 90111190 Plaintiff vs. Adversary No. TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES AFFIDAVIT OF NANCY MACINNES STATE OF NEW JERSEY) COUNTY OF QCEAN 3 SS- 1, NANCY MACINNES, of full a?e and duly sworn upon her oath, deposes and says: 3 1. On November 5, 1991, at agproximately 2:30 A.M., I was struck in the head by a patron of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino. I sustained the injuries which form the basis for the complaint filed in the United States District Court of New Jersey by my . attorney in November, 1992. V18. Case Doc 528 Fil . . . . . . ed 07/99/93 ntere - - Affidavxt In SUpport Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Ti'megro Filed 8553]? gt? dgigo?w magi of 4 2. At the time of the injury,'I gave a report to TRUMP PLAZA HOTEL AND CASINO security personnel. My best recollection is that I informed the security officers of my summer residence at 602 Pritchard Place, Newtown Square, and my permanent residence at 3736 Freshwater Drive, Jupiter, Florida. I spend several months each year in mostly during the late spring and summer months, and occassionally on visits in the winter. The remainder of the time is spent at my permanent address is in Florida. .3. I have inspected the documtnt (Exhibit A) which was filed with the Bankruptcy Court. The document lists my address as 602 Prichard Pl., Newtown, Pa. 19073. While the zip code is correct, my residence is located in Newtown Square, not Newtown, 4. I never received any lett rs or notices of any kind from Trump Plaza or anyone acting on be alf of Trump Plaza in relation to their Bankruptcy proceeding. 5. I have had a residence in for seven years. During that time, I have never given my address to anyone as Newtown instead of Newtown Square, because I am aware that NewtoWn is a different city in We have had problems with mail being incorrectly returned because of the similarities between the names. 6. I have on numerous occassions received mail correctly addressed to me from Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino because we are on their mailing list. - Case 92- 11188 -JHW Doc 528 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 14: 20: 05 Desc Affidavit In Support Of [527- 1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Of Claim a Page 3 of 4 I understand that this statement is made under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of New Jersey. Sworn and Subscribed to before me thisoz? day of May, 1993 EDWARD BASAMAN, ESQUIRE (4990) RP11100 03/20/92 u? AAC EODR THOMAS 10x IJOLD HARDING NJ 00320 EL TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES CREDITOR NAHE I ADDRESS REPORT CREDITOR N0.: EIRH TYPEISI: CROSS-REF ID: TARRAYER 10: .PAGE: TIHE: 1609 10:38:26 43224 11- TRH-32Q160 138909363 TACEBEO TRAVEL 213551 37 EAST CREDITOR FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 00- - 5012029 .-- J7- CREDITOR .FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REE ID: TAXPAYER ID: CREDITOR FIRH TYPEISJ: CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 63023 11- - 142342517 00- - 290000223 19910309 3-3-0 . CREDITOR ND.: FIRM TYPEIS): CROSS-REF In: ID: 33090 11- TRH-151011 103001701 CREDITOR H03: TYPEISI: CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: CREDITOR ND. FIRM TYPEISI: CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: CREDITOR ND.: FIRM TYPEIST: In: TARPAYER ID: 08- - .291600105 19911105 11- - TRH-10973O 196525579 11- - TRH-205965 147421163 NJ 00753 RTIU ?Anus 0. NARINO :33rN VER AVE CITY- NJ 00401 Hc: TED ST NY 14003 LL VIRGINIA L10 N00) 6TH STREET NJ 00360 TACEMNOD NANCY PL TENEORE PA 19073 . 2U 1A SHARON 510 ST SOUTH TY NJ 00220 333: CURTIS 122:) 0N AVE ILLE NJ 00232 DENISE L. 12212 ERION AVENUE ILLE 00232 00 1.13 FRANCES A 216-? SSAHIEKON A JE NJ 00000 0355 (U L) CREDITOR FIRE TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: CREDITOR FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF In: . TARPAYER Ina? TDD-312959 11? - TRM-200737 150509297 .PT.: RPTIIOO DATE: 03/20/92 PLAZA ASSOCIATES CREDITOR NAME I ADDRESS REPORT CREDITOR NO.: FIRM TYPEIS): CROSS-REE ID: TAXPAYER 10: PA- TIRE: 10:38:20 1650 $6770 11- - 168620915 CREDITOR NO.: FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 11- - TRH- 326087 140543066 MACK JOSEPH 005 NEERSLANDINO.R0A ERMA NJ 00200 HACK MICHAEL A 102 NELLINOTON AVE PLEASANTVILLE NJ 00232 HACK RODYNN A 20 PRINCETON ROAD CREDITOR N0.. EIRN CROSS-REF In; TANPAYER ID: CREDITOR N0.: EIRN TYPEISJ: CROSS-REE ID: TANPAYER ID: 11- - 306047212 CREDITOR EIRH TYPETS): CROSS-REF In: TARPAYER ID: 11- Tim-265066 03134137?.. CREDITOR ND.: CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 36334 11- - TRH-221176 210366168 and FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: TRH-115832 150242328 CREDITOR NO.: EIRN TYPEIST: CROSS-REF ID: TARPAYER ID: 38669 11- - TDD-27362 210069631 .CREDITOR FIRE TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 11- - TRH- 271017 140663050 SDHERS POINT .NJ 00244 HACK RODERICK 10 STONEY CREEK DR. LINNOOD NJ 00221 MACRAY a. 125 NORTH VERMONT P.O.1797 ATLANTIC CITY MACKENZIE RONALD 10 RISSAHICKOR AVE VENTNOR NJ 00400 MACREY DONALD 15 PORRECA DRIVE MILLVILLE NJ 00332 HACKEY DONOVAN 09 5TH AVE DRYN MAus PA 19000 NACREY HEATHER 15 PORRECA DRIVE NILLVILLE NJ 00332 MACREY NICNAEL 015 E. DRIOANTINE AV APT. 10 DRIOANTINE NJ 00203 CREDITOR NO.: FIRM canes-REE ID: TAXPAYER ID: 11- - TED-351684 139643320 423/ 4 4. Case 92- 111,88? Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/15 14. 2 Affidavit of Counsel. In Support Of [527-1] Motion :To Enlarge Time To File Progf05 94335:? of 19 LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD BASAMAN 1216 N-E. Central Avenue I mu, Seaside Park, New Jersey 08752 I i yarn 93 908 793 3080 Attorneys for Plaintiff By: EDWARD BASAMAH (EB 4990) UNITED BANKRUPTCY COURT on THE DISTRICT OF NEW grassy IN THE MATTER OF TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES thapter 11? 2/ DEBTQR Case No. 96:11188 90:11189 NANCY MACINNIS, 90111190 Plaintiff vs. Adversary No. TRUMP ASSOCIATES OF BASAMAN I - - 1? I, Edward Basaman, hereby certify as follows: 1. I am an attorney at law admitted to the Bar of the State of New Jersey, and the United Stat?s District Court of New Jersey. . 2. On November 2, 1992, I fiied a personal injury action in the United States District Court at Camden, New Jersey, relating to a injury that occurred 9n Novemher 5, 1991 when Mrs. MacInnis was struck in the head by a patrongof Trump Plaza. A true copy of the complaint is filed as A. I was unaware that Trump Plaza had filed a bankruptcy=proceeding at the time of filing the law suit. 1 3. On November 25, 1992, I ceived a letter from Patricia Wild, General Counsel 0f Trump Pla a Hotel and Casino requesting that I withdraw the complaint heca_se Ms. MacInnis had not filed Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 529 Filed Entered 05117716 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 2 of 19 a Notice of Claim. (EXHIBIT B) 4. I communicated with Ms. Wild, and was advised that Ms. Jennifer Stone, Esq. of Stanzione, Tobie, Stanziale was in charge of the Trump Plaza bankruptcy. I contacted Ms. Stone and requested that she consent to filing a late Notice of Claim. She refused to consent, At that time, I requested that I be provided with whatever information was on rebord to demonstrate that a Notice of Deadline for Filing a Probf of Claim had been mailed to Mrs. MacInnis. 5. After waiting several weeks, I again contacted Stanzione, Tobia, Stanziale and rbquested proof that the Notice of Deadline for Filing a Proof of Claim had been mailed to-Mrs. MacInnis. At that time, I was advised that their computer indicated that a notice had been madled to Mrs. MacInnis at an address in Newtown, Pa. Mrs. MacInnis live in Newtown Square, 6. I then went to a United States Post Office and ascertained that the Zip Code for Newtown, is 18940. Newtown is located in Bucks County, The Zip Code. of the town in which Mrs. MacInnis' lives, Newtown Square, Pa. is 19073, in Delaware County. I derided this information from the National Five?Digit Zip Code and Office Directory (1993 edition) which is available for inspection in all public post offices. On March 15, 1993, I wrote letters to both Ms. Wild and Ms. Stone advising them that there may have been a mistake in the mailing of the Notice of Deadline. I again requested that any . . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:95 Deso Affidavn Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 3 of 19 documents on file be forwarded to C?i, C?ii) I reCeived no answer. 8. On March 17, 1993, I received a letter from Ms. Wild again requesting that the lawsuit dismissed until a determination was reached by the nkruptcy Court. (EXHIBIT D) The letter discloses that there we a injury/mishap report on fiie at Trump plaza. I have not be'n given a copy of the report up to this date. I believe that the document will demonstrate that Mrs: MacInnis' correct address was on file with Trump Plaza. 9. On.March 30, 1993, I traveled to the United States Bankruptcy Court in Camden, New Jersey to seek information on whether Mrs. MacInnis was actually furnished a Notice of Deadline for Filing Claims at her correct address. On March 30, 1993, I Spent approximately four hours at dhe clerk's office.looking through the numerous volumes of maderial on file relating to the Trump Plaza bankruptcy which had td be retrieved from storage: 10. I discovered at that time that it appeared that numerous personal injury claimants had not received a Notice of Deadiine for Filing Claims because?of incorrect mailings by a third party organization'Claudia King and Associates.(EXHIBIT E) Because of my unfamiliarity with tHe bankruptcy filings, I did not locate the document pertaining?to-Ms. MacInnis on March 30,. 1993. 10. On April 5, 1993 I agreed to have Mrs. MacInnis? lawsuit administratively terminated without prejudice pending the outcome of this F) 11. On May 12, 1993, I returned to the Bankruptcy Court, . Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05l17l16 14:20:05 Desc Affrdavrt Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 4 of 19 and located the information regardimg Ms. MacInnis in one of the numerous volumes of pleading on filk. It is page G) The document clearly demonstratks that the Notice of Claim was mailed to Newtown, Pa., not Newtown Square, Pa. 12. I have interviewed severe? postal employees who advised me that if a letter was addressed tb Newton, Pa. with the Zip Code of Newtown Square, Pa, it coulh easily be redirected to Newtown, Pa. I was also advised th't the letter could have been returned to sender as incorrectly a dressed if it arrived in Newtown Square, and also the Zip Code could have been corrected to Newtown's Zip Code by any clerk while the letter was in the postal service distribution system. 12. Mrs. MacInnis lives in Florida all winter. After her return, I traveled to Newtown Square, Pa. to take her affidavit on May 20. 1993. 13. Mrs. MacInnis has sworn umder oath that she did not receive a Notice of Claim, or any other bankruptcy related mailing from Trump Plaza or any of their agents. Moreover she asserts that she receive mailings from Trump Plaza when correctly addressed to her home. 14. A Notice of Claim signed by Mrs. MacInnis has been included with this Motion. I certify that the foregoing is truE and that if any of the forgoing is wilfully false, I am su ject to punishment. DATED: July 8, 1993 E's/Maw EDWARD ESQUIRE Attorney for Plaintiff Case 92? 11188 -JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14: 20: 05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527- 1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 5 of 19 r??bl?U?u-?t-mw-9? of? ?3 EDWARD BASAHAN, ESQ. (4990) 999 . 1125 Atlantic Ave., suite 700 i Atlantic city, New Jersey 08401 . "u ?mil- {:tglh: uu?mh 609-340- "5818 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE be new JERSEY NANCY HACINNIB Plaintiff, Civil Action No. vs. 17,- 9705' TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND JOHN DOE - - Defendant.? QURIBDICTION Plaintiff bases subject matter jurisdiction on 28 U.S.C. 1332 in that*this is a civil action between citizens of different states wherein the matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interests and costs, the sum or value of Fifty Thousand Dollars PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Nancy MacInnis,.resides at 3736 Freshwater Drive, Jupiter, Florida. . 2. TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES (hegeinafter TRUMP PLAZA), doing business as Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its principal place of-business at Pacific Avenue, Atlantic 5/4; A I Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 6 of 19 City, New Jersey. Defendant reguharly does business within the District of New Jersey; a part ofgits business is directly related to the subject matter of the present action, as hereinafter more fully explained.' FIRST COUNT Plaintiff, NANCY MAC INNIS, by way of Complaint through her attorneys, complains of personal injuries against the Defendant_ for negligence in the ownership and control of his property, and - negligence of its agents and employees acting under his control. 1. Defendant, TRUMP PLAZA, owns and operates a major hotel resort and casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey.? As part of its operations, TRUMP PLAZA, solicits patrons to enter its casino to participate in gambling-and entertainment activities. As an enticement to gamblers, TRUMP PLAZA provides-alcoholic beverages free of charge. 2. On or about November 4, 1991, Plaintiff, was lawfully on the premises of TRUMP PLAZA located in Atlantic City as a business invitee. Plaintiff had received an invitation from TRUMP PLAZA to a Monday Night Football Party which was regularly held to attract patrons to Defendant's premises. At the completion of this party, Plaintiff%engaged in gambling activities in Defendant's casino. 3. At approximately 2:30 A.M. on November 5, l991, Plaintiff/approached a blackjack table. Defendant, JOHN DOE, was seated at this table playing blackjack. As she approached, Defendant JOHN DOE, raised his clenched fist, and swung around from the table: He violently struck Plaintiff in the head, and Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof. Page 7 of 19 causing Plaintiff to fall backwards. 4. Immediately after striking Plaintiff and causing her injury, Defendant, JOHN DOE, attempted to assist Plaintiff. At that time, Plaintiff was able to observe Defendant's physical condition. Defendant JOHN DOE was visibly intoxicated. 5. At its casino, DefeAdant TRUMP PLAZA employs security personnel. Unknown secumity officers were immediately upon the scene of the incident in which Defendant JOHN DOE struck Plaintiff. Realizing that Plaintikf had suffered injuries, she was escorted to a medical facilitylwithin TRUMP PLAZA by an unknown security officer employed by TRUMP PLAZA. 6. Plaintiff requested that the security officer obtain the identity of Defendant JOHN Doe. Defendant's agents, although having Defendnat JOHN DOE under their control, allowed said defendant to leave the premises operated by TRUMP PLAZA. 7. Plaintiff was transported from TRUMP PLAZA to Atlantic City Medical Center. Sheiwas suffering severe cervical pain, and vertigo. She also sustained a severe injury. 8. After receiving treatment in the Atlantic City Medical Center emergency room, Plaintiff was transported back to TRUMP PLAZA. She was offered accommodations at the facility free of charge. Because Plaintiff was dezy, she declined to stay at TRUMP PLAZA, and was transported to a friend's nearby home in transportation provided by TRUMP ZA. 9. As a result of the ne ligence of Defendant, TRUMP PLAZA, DEFENDANT JOHN DOE, was prov ded alcoholic beverages free of charge to the point wherein he became intoxicated and unable Case DQC 515 Filed .l21I93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:93 Desc Stipulation ??eIWeen Counsel Eqr?entor Assesses and Counsel For Page 1 of 7 0. HOGAN A. Anmue u. AanAmoer-z KENNETH o. ROTH IRA e. MEGDAI. 0. LAVEFIY. QR. n. oasnLANc-ER consot: HARRY A. HDRWITZ DEAN C. WALDT HOWARD s. MEMnthoN KEITH ROBERT J. TERRI JANE FREEDMAN LAW CORPORATION 499 QOOPER ROAD Box no. 5459 CHERRY HILZL. NJ. 03002 (609} 637-6000 May 21, 1993 Eng 3 "33 Dams, BEBERELENHY 8c 3n.--r33r 'a?h FAX: 609-6 673434- n-cotun? . OF COQNSEL C. DAVIS WILLIAM CLARENCEP. REBERKENNY H. BRENT THOMAS P. THACKSTON BAR Heal-I992) vra DELIVERY Clerk United States Bankruptcy Court 15 N. 7th Street Camden, NJ 08102 Re: In re Trump Plaza Assqciates, et a1. Case Nos. and TO THE CLERK: Please accept for'filing in the above?referenced chapter 11 Case the original and one copy of the enclosed Stipulation of Settlement. gudge Wizmur entered an Order apprOving the Stipulation of Settlement on May'20, 1993 based upon a facsimile signature. 'Pursuant to instructions from the Court, we are enclosing the original Stipulation of Settlement for filing. Please file-stamp the enclosed additional copy 0f_the Stipulation of Settlement and return the same to our messenger. Thank you for your courtesy. If you have any questions cenCerning the above or require anything further, please call me at your convenience. Sincerely, DAVIS, REBERKENNY BRAMOWITZ, P.C. By: Dean C. Waldt Encl. 3 cc: The Honorable Judith H. Wizjur (w/o encl.) TLC. 3 )Case Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc S?bulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 2 of 7 .. pf?'f COURT . i ARTHUR J. ABRAMOWITZ, ESQUIRE DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. 499 Cooper Landing Road P.0. Box 5459 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (609) 667?6000 Attorneys for McGahn, Friss Miller UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: - Case Nos. 92?11188 (JW) 92?11189 TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1, 92?11190 (JW) Debtors. Hearing Date: SETTLEMENT This Stipulation of Settlement (?Stipulation") is entered into by and between Trump Plaza Associates, Debtor in the above referenced chapter 11 case ("Debtor?) and McGahn, Friss Miller ("McGahn"), McGahn Friss and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr. (collectively "Defendants"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel, subject to the entry of an order by the Court approving this Stipulation, under the terms and conditions set forth hereinbelow, as follows: i i 1. On or about April 16, 1992, McGahn filed a Proof of Claim 1 in the amount of $793,215.22. OnIor about Au9ust 18, 1992, McGahn filed an Amended Proof of Claim id the amount of $813,191.63 (collectively the ?Claim"). 2. On or about dune 25, 199j, the Debtor filed an omnibus Motion seeking to disallow, reduc or expunge certain claims (the . Case Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 14:20:03 0380 Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 3 of 7 "Motion"). Among the claims which Debtor sought to reduce and/or expunge was the claim of the firm of McGahn. 3. McGahn?s claim is based upon fees and expenses incurred on behalf of the Debtor by McGahn in providing legal services to the 'Debtor prior to the date Debtor filed its chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey (the "Bankruptcy Court"). 4. On July 3D, 1992, McGahn filed an objection to Debtor's Motion. 5. On or about February 5. 1993. Debtor initiated Adversary Proceeding No. 93?1022 (JWS (the ?Adversary Proceeding") in the above referenced chapter 11 case against the Defendants seeking, inter li judgment against Defendants for compensatory and punitive damages. 6. On or about March 5, 1993, the Defendants filed an answer in the Adversary Proceeding. .7, Without conceding liability each one to the other, Debtor and Defendants wish to settle and resolve all claims between them related to the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding. 8. Debtor and Defendants, in-consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration. and intending to be legally bound hereby, subject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court, agree as folloes: A. Debtor and Defendants agree and stipulate to the entry of an Order by the Bankruptcy Court in the form attached hereto as Exhibit approving this Stipulation and making it binding on Debtor, Defendants and all other persons and parties in interest . ., Case Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 4 of 7 including but not limited to all persons and entities claiming under, by or through either Debtorior Defendants. B. Debtor and Defendant; agree that Debtor shall pay to MCGahn the sum of FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500, 000) (the "Settlement Funds") in settlement of both the Motion and the Adversary Proceeding, and in full satisfaction for all legal services performed by McGahn on behalf of the Debtor through the date hereof, to be paid pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. C. At or before 2:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on Friday, May 21, 1993, Debtor shall hand deliver to McGahn at 1600 Atlantic Avenue, Longport, New JerSey Debtor's check in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS Debtor shall be obligated to make this payment on May 21, 1993 as agreed on the record before the Bankruptcy.Court regardless of whether the Bankruptcy Court has entered the Order approving this Stipulation by such date. If, for any reason, the Bankruptcy Court does not approve this Stipulation, the payment referred to in this subparagraph shall be returned to the Debtor. D. The remainder of the Settlement Funds, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS shall be paid by the Debtor to McGahn on or before the end of business 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time) on December 7, 1993. 9. If Debtor fails to make either of the payments referred to hereinabove on or before the dates and times that such payments are required under the terms of this Stipulation, McGahn may file a Certification with the Bankruptcy ourt indicating the amount of such payment(s) which have not been received and declaring a-default under the terms of this Stipulation. -31 . .. Case Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 5 of 7 10. Upon the filing of such a Certification by McGahn with the Dankruptcy Court, Debtor hereby consents to the entry of a judgment against it in the Bankruptcy Court for the outstanding unpaid amount of the Settlement Funds as of the date of the filing of said Certification, as set forth therein. 11. If a consent judgment is entered against Debtor upon Debtor's default under this Stipulation, Debtor hereby waives any and all defenses now existing or hereafter arising with respect to such judgment and/or McGahn's execltion upon such judgment and, furthermore, Debtor expressly to McGahn's execution with respect to such judgment on Debtor's assets, wherever located, by any means permitted by law. Debtor specifically and irrevocably waives any and all right to contest, seek to open, or otherwise challenge the entry of and execution upon a judgment entered by McGahn in accordance with the terms of this Stipulation. 12. Upon execution of this Stipulation, the Claim shall be deemed compromised and settled for the sum of $500,000 pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation, the Motion shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice and the Adversary Proceeding shall be deemed dismissed with prejudice. 13. Upon execution of this Stipulation, Debtor, for itself and its respective predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, stockholders, attorneys, agents and assigns, hereby releases and forever discharges Defendants and their respective predecessors, successors, principals, partners, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions, causes of action Case 92- 11188-JHW Doc 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:03 Desc Stipulation Between Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 6 of 7 and/or suits of any kind or nature chatsoever, whether now known or unknown, arising or in any way rela ed to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceeding, including, but not limited to, any and all claims which are or could have been asserted therein. 14. Contingent upon the timely receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn under the terms of this Stipulation, Defendants, for themselves and their predecessors, successors, principals, employees, attorneys, agents and assigns, hereby release and forever discharge Debtor and its respective predecessors, successors, parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, directors, Officers, employees, stockholders, partners, including but not limited to Donald J. Trump, limited partners, attorneys, agents and assigns from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions, causes of action and/or suits of any kind or nature whatsoever, whether now known or unknown, arising out of or in any way related to the subject matter of the Motion and/or the Adversary Proceeding, including but not limited to any and all claims which are or could have been asserted therein. Defendants' release of Debtor contained in this Paragraph 13 is expressly contingent upon the timely receipt of the Settlement Funds by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. If the Settlement Funds are not timely received by McGahn pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation, Defendants' release of Debtor contained herein shall be null and void ab iqitig, as if this Stipulation had never been executed. 15. The parties hereto agree,Jsubject to the approval of the Bankruptcy Court, that no notice 01 this Stipulation to creditors or other parties in interest of the Debtor is required. Case 92-11188-JHW Dec 515 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05l17/16 14'20'03 . . . esc Stipulation BoeIWeen Counsel For Debtor Trump Plaza Associates and Counsel For Page 7 of 7 16. This Stipulation constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto, and no subseque alteration, amendment, change or addition to the Stipulation shal be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to a writing executed by the parties hereto and approved by the Bankruptcy Court. 17. This Stipulation may be executed in one or more counterparts, which, taken together, shall constitute one in the same original Stipulation. SCH ARTZ, TOBIA STANZIALE Cou sel for Trump Plaza ocistes i i 6? Charles A. Stanziale, Esquire DAVIS, REBERKENNY ABRAMOWITZ, P.C. Counsel for McGahn, Friss Miller; McGahn Fries and Patrick T. McGahn, Jr. QWVW Arthur J. Abramowyyz, Esquire 1713R.l Dated: May 20, 1993 1 Case 92-11188-JHW DOC 517 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Order Granting [464-1] Motion For Reconsidera STEEL HECTOR DAVIS Attorneys for Independent Lampen, Parks Siegel 200 South Biscayne Boulevar Miami, Florida 33131-2398 (305) 557-2800 WEIL, GOTSHAL MANGES Attorneys for Fidelity Mana Research Company 767 Fifth Avenue New York, New York (212) 310-8000 9/ 10153 I In re: TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES Sit; ELJLLI Debtors. 3' tion Of Courts Letter Opinio Page 1 of 3 rectors - 4lst Fl. ement UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 92-11188 JW 92-11189 JW 92-11190 JW CASE NOS. CHAPTER 11 ORDER GRANTING RECONS DERATION OF LETTER OPINION DATED OCTOBER 6, 1992 ALLOWING COMPENSATION TO STEEL HECTOR DAVIS SERVICES RENDERED AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE PURSUANT TO OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE I Upon the joint mot Research Company ("Fidelity' dated February 18, Rule 9023 of the Federal Ru] :ion of Fidelity Management and Steel Hector Davis 1993 (the "Motion"), pursuant to .es of Bankruptcy Procedure, requesting that the Court rTconsider its letter opinion dated October 6, 1992 (the 'Letter Opinion") denying the ?17 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 517 Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Desc Order Granting [464-1] Motion For Reconsideration Of Courts Letter Opinio Page 2 of 3 1' application dated June 29, 1992 of as attorneys for the directors of Trump Plaza'Funding, Inc. and certain directors of Corp., for an allowance of compensation for services rendered and reimbursement of expenses incurred as an administrative expense putsuant to section 503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, (the "Fee Application"); and Notice of Motion having been given in accordance with the order of the Court dated April 30, 1992; End hearings having been held on April 6, 1993 to consider the Motion (the "Preliminary Hearing"), and April 29, 1999 to consider the Application (the "Hearing"); and upon consideration of the Motion, the Application and the record of the Preliminary Hearing and the Hearing; and upon the decision of the Court as set forth on the record of the Hearing made after due deliberation; and sufficient cause appear?ng therefor; it is ORDERED that pursuant to sections 503(b)(1)(A) and 503(b)(3)(D) and (4) of title 11, of the United States Code, the Motion be, and it hereby is, granted in all respects; and it is further ORDERED that the ?etter Opinion be, and it hereby is, vacated in order that the Court may reconsider the Fee Application; and it is further ORDERED that upon the Court's reconsideration of the Fee Application, be, and it hereby is, granted an Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 51? Filed 05/21/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:04 Desc . Order Granting [464-1] Motion For Reconsideration Of Courts Letter Opinio Page 3 of 3 1 allowance of compensation and reimbursement of expenses in the respective amounts of $1 5,000 and $5,078.06, and that the Debtors be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to pay said amounts to Fidelity to be applied as reim- bursement for the fees and egpenses heretofore paid to by Fidelity. Date: Camden, New Jersey May}! 1993 By:i jig/4% p?ited States Bankruptcy Judge . I -J i Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/15 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-3.] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 8 of 19 to control his emotions and judgement. Alcoholic beverages are psyco?active drugs with a known propensity to cause agressive and violent conduct in a significant percentage of the population. Defendant, TRUMP PLAZA, knew or should have known that the excitement of gambling for high stikes, combined with the ingestion of alcoholic beverages could cause said violent conduct. 10. As a condition of its license to operate a casino ?facility within New Jersey, Defendant TRUMP PLAZA, is obligated to employ a large security force td maintain order within its casino. Said security force has privileges granted to them to investigate and detain casino patrons involved in unusual incidents, accidents or altercatiois upon its premises, including incidents in which-civil laws may be violated. 11. As a result-of the conduct of Defendant, JOHN DOR, said security forces knew or should have known that it was necessary to obtain the identity of Defendant JOHN DOE to fulfill its duty to conduct a reasonable investigation. Despite having control over Defendant JOHN DOE, said security personnel of TRUMP PLAZA was negligent in conducting a reasonable investigation of the aforesaid incident. 12. In addition to its negligence in failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of the aforesaid incident, said security personnel of TRUMP PLAZA engaged in conduct which led Plaintiff NANCY MAC INNIS, to rely on them to conduct a reasonable investigation, and did thereby cause her to forego calling the Atlantic City Police Department, or other properly Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05(17/15 14:20:05 Desc Affida?t Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 9 of 19 authorized law enforcement personnel, in order to investigate the aforesaid incident. 13. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of 'negligence, carelessness and reckiessness, of the Defendant, TRUMP PLAZA, the Plaintiff, MAC INNIS, has sustained serious, permanent and disabling injuries, great pain and emotional trauma, and loss of the?enjoyment of ordinary life activities. WHEREFORE, the Plaintif?, NANCY MACINNIS demands judgement against the Defendant, PLAZA ASSOCIATES, for damages together with interest and costs of suit. saoonn touxw 1. Plaintiff repeats a realleges the allegations of the previous Count and makes them aragraph one of this Count as though the same were set forth at dength herein. 2. Defendant, JOHN DOE is'a fictitiOUS name is utilized solely to protectiplaintiff's interests in this matter. It is Plaintiff's intention to amend this complaint as discovery reveals the Defendant's true identity. 3. Defendant, JOHN DOE is an individual who was gambling at a high stakes black jack table operated by TRUMP PLAZA at the releVant times ierein. 4. Defendant, JOHN DOE, was negligent and reckless in failing to control his conduct by liolenting swinging his fist I and thereby violently striking Plaintiff in the head, causing her to fall backwards. i 5. As a direct and prox'mate result of the acts of I Case 92- -11188? Doc 529 Filed 07/09l93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527- 1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 10 of 19 negligence, carelessness and reckhessness, of the Defendant, TRUMP PLAZA, the Plaintiff, MAC INNIS, has sustained serious, permanent and disabling injuries, great pain and emotional trauma, and loss of the enjoyment of ordinary life activities. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, MACINNIS demands judgement against the Defendant, TRUMP HOTEL AND CASING, for damages together with interest and costs ef suit. EDWI1LRD BMW, ESQ. (4990) I BY: ?24,925. . \l EDW BASEHAN, EBQUIRE (4990) 112 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 700 City, New Jersey 08401 ATT RNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Dated: October 28,1992 DEMAND JURY Plaintiff hereby demands a tnial by jury of twelve (12) persons on all Counts herein, pursuant to P. 38 ESQ. (4990) Dated: October 23, 1992 I fT- . ammo anew, EBQUIRE ?Tr PLAINTIFF Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed Z: Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1 .3 ,r - erge Time To File Proof Page 11 of 19 .. A .ru, I . HOTEL AN CASINO VIA CERTIFIED MAILARETURN RECEIPT ksoussmno. Novehber 25, 1992 Edward Basaman, Esquire 1125 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 700 Atlantic city, New Jersey 08401 RE: Nancy MacInnes vs. Trump Pleat Associates . District Court for the D'strict of New Jersey Case No. 92 cv 4795 (JBS) Dear Mr. Basaman: I am in receipt of the.compiaint filed by yOu in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of your client, Nancy MacInnes. On March 9, 1992, Trump Pla:a Associates filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the United St tes Bankruptcy Code. On that date, the Court entered an Order setting a Bar Date for the filing of proofs of claim and prdviding for notice of that bar date to all scheduled creditors. Ms. MacInnes was among the personal injury claimants listed on Trump Plaza's bankruptcy schedule. our records indicate that Ms. MacInnes was sent notice of the Bar Date, but that she failed to file a proof of claim with the Bankruptcy Court. Therefore, Ms. MacInnes' claims against Trump Plaza are barred by the Order of Confirmation which was entered by the Bankruptcy Court on April 30, 1992 and by 11 U.S.C. Section 524. Therefore, I would request that you immediately dismiss the complaint. . If; i mun 1992 I The Boardwalk at Mississippi Ave. 0 Atlaritlc City, H.J. 08401 0 609-441-6000 Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed Entered 05/17l16 14: 20: 05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527 1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 12 of 19 Edward Basaman, Esquire November 25,1992 Page 2 If you believe that you halve the right to maintain this claim against Trump Plaza I would advise you to contact our bankruptcy' counsel Jennifer' Stone of Schwartz, Tobia and Stanziale at (201) 746? ?6000. Very truly yours, ow. ea WV) '1 cap PATRICIA M. WILD Vice President, General Counsel PMW/njd c: Narkiewicz Jennifer D. Stone, Esquire Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09 93 Entered 05/17/10 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 13 of 19 LAWO ICEOF EDWARD 112s ATLANTIC A NUE.SU1TE 705 ATLANTIC cm, WJERSEY 03401 TELEPHONE 509 340 5313 March 15, 1993 Ms. Patricia M. Wild Vice President . General Counsel 5 Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino 1 The Boardwalk at Mississippi Avenue- Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401 RE: Nancy MacInnes vs. Tiump Plaza U.S. District Court of New Jersey 92 CV 4705 . Dear Ms. Wild, I have been informed by Ms. St ne that she will not consent to the filing of a late proof of Cl im in this matter. Because of a possible discrepancy in the mailing address on the Order setting the bar date. we will petition the Court to allow Mrs. MacInnes to file a late claim. As you may know, we have namedja John Doe in this matter, who punched Mrs. Maclnnes while he was gambling at the casino. Accordingly, we will need access tolall information on file at Trump Plaza in order to locate thislperson. I would prefer to use the official discovery devices afforded by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in order to insure we have access to all Trump Plaza records relating to events surrounding Mrs. MacInnes' injury. Under the circumstances, I would ask that Trump Plaza now answer the complaint in this matter?at which time you may set forth your affirmative defenses. A so I would like some assurances that there are no insura ce policies covering liability for the injury to Mrs. Ma Innes. If'there are any questions, pl,ase do not hesitate to call. Very truly youzsll d?i?aasgp a~u+uu" Edward Basaman cc: Ms. Nancy MacInnes . Ms. Jennifer Stone, Esq. 22% Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support [moo . EBleme Time To File Proof Page 14 of 19 lifi?ihdIXTq 1125 Ammo A NUE, sum: 705 ATLANTIC cm. aw JERSEY 03401 TELEPHON 609 3.40 5818 March 15, 1993' Jennifer Stone, Esq. Schwartz, Tobia, and Stanziale 22 Crestmont Road Montclair, New Jersey 07042 RE: Nancy MacInnes vs. Thump Plaza U.S. District Court New Jersey 92 cv 4705 Dear Ms. Stone, I was expecting a facsimile of the information On file with respect to Mrs. MacInnes which weregpurportedly show the addresses used to mail Notice regarding the Trump Bankruptcy. There appears to be a discrepancy bptween the address to which the claim was supposedly mailed, and the address where Mrs. MacInnes actually lives during the summer. In addition, Ms. MacInnes spends her winters at her primary residence in Jupiter, Florida. It is quite possible the letter was not forwarded to her if the address was not correct. In any event, Mrs. MacInnes ha' no knowledge of receiving the Order setting the bar date. Kindly send me all information on file in respect to Mrs. MacInnes-in order that I may prepare a pleading for the Court to file a late claim on her behalf. Very truly-yours, {aura} dram Edward Basaman cc: Ms. Patricia M. Wild, Esq. Ms. Nancy Maclnnes Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed i 3 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc ?Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1]" a, 5. HOTEL AN . CASINO Mardh 17, 1993 Edward Basaman, Esquire 1125 Atlantic Avenue Suite 705 Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401 RE: MacInnes v. Trump Plaza Dear Mr. Basaman: Please be advised, in response to your letter of March 15, 1993, that Trump Plaza has no intention answering the complaint which you filed in November, As I explained in my previous letter to you, in maintaining theicomplaint you are in violation of the Order of the Bankruptcy Court which bars claims by persons who did not file the required.Proof-ofiC1aim by the bar date set ?by the Court. Therefore, I'd again request that you withdraw the 'complaint until you have received permission from the Bankruptcy Court to file a late claim. As a courtesy, please be advised that our guest injury/mishap report on the incident involving Ms. MacInnes indicates that the identity of the?patron who accidentally struck Ms. MacInnes is unknown. Veryitruly yours, w- 00:th rim-121mm M. WILD Vice President, General Counsel PMW/njd 0: Jennifer Stone, Esquire The Boardwalk at Mississippi Ave. . Atlantic City, NJ. 08401 - 609-441-6000 .0 ?arge Time To File Proof Page 15 of 19 . to. Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/l6 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel in Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 16 of 19 UNITED STATES HANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE OF NEW JERSEY re: Chapter 11 g" a TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, rd et_al., Case NO. 90-11188 Debtors. 90-11189 90-11190 DECLARATION OF MAILING dE NOTICE OF 341 MEETING AND NOTICE OF FILING CERTAIN PROOFS OF CLAIM AND PROOF OF CLAIM NOTICE OF HEARING To CONSIDER APPROV OF THE DISCLOSURE STATEMEIT AND PREPETITION SOLICIATION OF VOTES WITH RESPECT To THEIR PLAN AND (ii) THE CONFIRHATION OF THAT PLAN I, Elizabeth A. Crocker, declare as follows: 1. I am over the age of eighteen years and an associate of Claudia King Associates, Inc., 66 York Street, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302. 2. On March 19, 1992, I served copies of Exhibit A, of Declaration of mailing of Notice of 341 Meeting and Notice of Filing Certain Proofs of Claim a: 1d Proof of Claim and Notice of Hearing to Consider (1) Approval of the Debtors' Disclosure Statement and Prepetition SOli ciation Of Votes with Respect to Their Plan and (ii) the Confirmation of that Plan, upon those parties listed on Exhibit by causing true copies of the Notices securely enclosed in postz :ge pre-paid envelopes, to be I Case 92-11188-JHW Doe 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527?1] Motion To Enlarge Time To File Proof Page 17 of 19 delivered to the office of the ited States Postal Services, for delivery by first?class mail. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Jersey sity, New Jersey this )gikwday of h- March, 1992. cam. Elizabeth A. Crocker Case 92-11188-JHW Doc 529 Filed 07/09/93 Entered 05/17/16 14:20:05 Desc Affidavit Of Counsel In Support Of [527-1] Motion To Enlarge Time To FIle Proof Page 18 . IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY NANCY MACINNIS, Plaintiffls), v. Civil No. 92-4705 (Jle TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES, et a1., Defendant(s). QRDER ADMINISTRATIVE TSRNINATION It appearing that the dEEendant in this action has filed a petition in bankruptcy, and that this case is automatically stayed by operation of 11 U.S.C. Section 362 unless and until relief from the stay is granted by a Judge of the Bankruptcy Court; IT IS this day of April, 1993 hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall administratively terminate this case upon his records without prejudice to the right of any party to reopen the matter for further proceedings consistent with law. Fl LED APR 51993 Q?m ag- OMB B. SIMANDLE, 'ted States District Judge RPT1100 TATE: 03l26/92 CD :4 u? c: 1Ac??m TNONAS OLD NARDINC NJ 00320 :0 TROHP PLAZA ASSOCIATES CREDITOR NAME I ADDRESS REPORT CREDITOR NO.: FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: PAGE: TIME: 1649 10:38:28 43224 11- - 138609363 :13?3 37 EAST CREDITOR NO.: FIRH ID: TAXPAYER ID: 00? - -311. CREDITOR FIRM TYPEISJ: CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 11- - TRH-321760 102842517 CREDITOR NO.: EIRN TYPEISJ: CROSS-REE ID: TAXPAYER ID: 08' 290600223 19910309 CREDITOR NO.: FIRH CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER 11- - -193451751 . . . .. . CREDITOR NO.: FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 08- - 291600105 19911105 CREDITOR HO.: FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 35070 11- - 196525579 --?mqi ER NJ 00753 NAXINO .33zgiipOYER AVE CITY NJ 00401 rd . ..IEE 14043 0:03 i: VIRGINIA 110 HOC 0TN STREET NJ 00300 a) IAC NANCY .02 REICNARD PL 1500305 PA 19073 13:2 TACETTSN SHARON 510 111R ST SOUTH (CITY NJ 00220 El CURTIS 1220 gnu AUE NJ 00232 DENISE L. :22 . ERIOH AVENUE VILLE 0) NJ 08232 CREDITOR FIRH CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: CREDITOR RO.: FIRH TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 39776 11- - 147021163 135723793 ?-340- um FRANCES A IIMSISSAHICXON A JEW NJ 00400 CD U) :0 C) Af?davit CREDITOR RO.: TYPEIS): CROSS-REF ID: TAXPAYER ID: 11- - 158569247 .PT.: RPT1100 DATE: 03/26/92 TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES CREDITOR RARE I ADDRESS REPORT RA TIRE: 10:38:28 1650 HACK JOSEPN 005 NEEXSLANDINC RDA ERHA NJ 08200 HACK NICNAEL A 102 RELLINCTON AVE PLEASANTUILLE NJ 00232 NACR RDOYNN A 20 PRINCETON ROAD SOHERS POINT NJ 00240 NACX RODERICX 10 STOREY CREEK DR. LINNOOD NJ 00221 NACXAY 0. 125 NORTH DERNONT P.O.1797 101 00009 NACXENIIE RONALD 14 NISSANICXON ADE UENTNOR NJ 00406 HACKEY DONALD 15 PDRRECA DRIVE NILLDILLE NJ 00332 NACXEY DORODAN 09 51" AVE DRYN NADS PA 19000 NACXEY HEATHER 15 PORRECA DRIVE HILLUILLE NJ 00332 HACKEY MICHAEL 615 E. BRIGANTINE AV APT. 16 BRIGANTINE NJ 03205 CREDITOR NO.: 40770 EIRN TYPETS): 11- CROSS-REP ID: TRN-301773 TAXPAYER ID: 140020915 CREDITOR NO.: 43210 PIRN 11- - CROSS-REF ID: Tun-324007 TAXPAYER ID: 140543000 CREDITOR NO.: 30572 FIRH 11- CROSS-REF ID: TEN-272023 TARPAYER ID: 100540370 CREDITOR 00.: 40077 FIRN TYPEISJ: 11- - CROSS-REF ID: TRN-297079 TAXPAYER ID: 304047212 CREDITOR NO.: 37040 PIRN 11- - CROSS-REF In: TEN-205000 CREDITOR NO.: 30334 EIRN TYPEIS): 11- CROSS-REP ID: TAXPAYER ID: 210300100 CREDITOR 31577 FIRH TYPEIS): 11? - ID: TRN-115032 TAXPAYER ID: 150242320 CREDITOR NO.: 30009 PIRN TYPEIS): 11? - CROSS-REE ID: TRN-2730: TAXPAYER ID: 210409031 CREDITOR 30477 FIRN TYPEIS): 11- CROSS-REF ID: TRN-271017 TAXPAYER ID: 140003050 CREDITOR NO.: 45701 PIRN TYPEIS): 11- - CROSS-REP ID: TRN-351004 TAXPAYER ID: 139043320 "3 I 437/? it