interest on their modest charge will judgment and so now we're here with respect to the plan and we believe that the plan which was confirmed the six them in a plan should be reversed and sent back can somebody is somebody percent of the total unsecured claims now what the decision on the interest does to our claim you know is significant the principal amount of that one point nine number i just gave you was is a million  through the confirmation date into september of twenty seventeen the interest that would have accrued is about five hundred ninety six thousand dollars that gives us the confirmation during the five year term of the plan another eight hundred ninety five thousand dollars of interest will accrue and so when you add that all that up and then deduct what is essentially the eighty three percent of the hundred fifty thousand that goes on secure creditors what happens at the end of the plan is that appellant's would have a claim of about three point two seven million dollars so starting with claim of titian date of a million nine going through the whole plan at the end of the day eight and a half years after the petition was filed appellants claim would be three point two seven million dollars but your position is the rest of the end securities get the same six and a half percent given the other unsecured you would receive twenty five thousand five hundred dollars they would get seventeen percent of the hundred fifty thousand nine eleven says that there has to be to demolish will proof that there's not going to be a required further liquidation or a further need for reorganization and hear that for the reorganization or a liquidation is certain all this plan is about is delay the only source of payment under this plan is the salary that mr hamilton would their their disposable income to payment on a plan so there's no ability to build wealth there's no ability under what we're hearing from the debtor side appellee side to to grow any sort of asset and be in any position whatsoever to provide any payment to a palace other than the one hundred twenty four thousand five hundred dollars which is about eight percent of the interest or cruel from position date through the projected into the plan about fourteen percent of the interests accruals during the plan period so as as the now observed in the prior appeal true in that decision is abundantly true here this is about the way after getting a two million dollar judgment and having that judgment determine to be  problematic and all the reasons you suggested it shouldn't be confirmed is there a way to make is it possible for unsecure it's to get paid for eleven in this kind of scenario and if it isn't i think we just have to confront that well i you're i think it's possible but the allow it said that you could do it and didn't allow that case because there was no balance and just this year there was no balancing but in most cases there were plans the starting point for both of those plans was one hundred percent payment to the non the creditor that has the non historical claim has leverage that other creditors don't you know that's the reality that changes the dynamic rather then cram down a plan that is you know the minimum bit and you end up with a six point five percent distribution the creditors but i think when we look at this in the totality of the circumstances and that's why i think so much of the dollar associates case which has always been what the real effects are and here the real effect is that the debtors stole a business and there were there are financial consequences t with whether or not a c c was the alter ego the court made various statements that we reflect in our brief about how this is suspicious of us kind of smells funny i  ultimately the bankruptcy judge said we really don't have to go there we'll have to decide if this company should be part of the bankruptcy of state because the only source of funds is what mr hamilton salary is going to be and that's going to be the same whether it's part of this estate or not i think that misses the boat because i think there's an economic entity that was created there that actually might have driven a co but the debtors didn't want that in their state and they took the effort to take it away from the estate and keep it probably separate you've got about four minutes  in the record but i can assure the core that there were many attempts at mediation two or three formal mediations all of which failed and not because of my client's conduct necessarily not because they were difficult negotiations the court probably has the flavor of this type of disputes i won't dwell on the point is that the ever before made these people came into bankruptcy because they had a judgment they could not pay that's never been disputed in fact it's affirmatively conceded by a lead in their papers to the court's question to the point that what is going to happen if they can't reorganize these people came in in good faith because they had a choice appeal the judgment or deal with it in bankruptcy and pay what they're required to pay under the bankruptcy laws the appeal or getting a bomb freest through the bankruptcy is that the gist of it well hardly bonds free your honor they did not have money to post an appeal but you have history meantime a million bucks has been spent and paid on account of these issues right it has been over here and it's not going not because of the debtors conduct we fundamentally through the course of six amended plans what happened is we had very two hostile litigants and this is reflected in the record you had which was the entity that was formed fighting against hamilton to prevent him from competing the only way mr to go in and say well we'll go into bankruptcy you're going to have to destroy to contribute all your disposable earnings for the next five years any property you have that is an example is going to go to pay creditors and that there will be a determination about my discharge ability and at the end of the day you will have to pay whatever is deemed to be not historical you can fight the not just hard ability characterization and he did that and so you have a plan in front of you that contributes all of his disposable earnings under this plunder thirteen twenty five is required by eleven twenty nine  fifteen that's all in there it has a that freezes about a ninety thousand dollars payment to creditors there was a sixty thousand dollars payment from suma to the estate which gives you an idea of where that litigation went your hon and that payment was put into the estate is the first payment under the plan he negotiated with his employer and yes it was a family company because frankly at that point he was having a difficult time finding a trade partner that he could work with he had had two very and now went to a family owned business there's no doubt about it that company was set up under the watchful eyes of the bankruptcy court and everything was fully disclosed during this chapter eleven process about what happened what revenue would come in and how it was going to support the plan all that was done in a good faith to attempt to repay a large amounts of money that he knew he was going to have to repay whether it was the five hundred thousand i'm out that we thought would be not dischargeable to begin and we knew there was going to be a part we stipulated to part of the judgment being dischargeable because there was an intent element found by the jury hamilton didn't try to challenge that went in and stipulated that part of it was going to be not dischargeable but still put this plan together sought funding to pay the admin so that he could get through this process reject the sumo operating agreement that was keeping him from competing and making the money he would need makes otherwise he's out of business what could never pay these kinds of things paid huge attorney's fees fighting with the elite and was  these five different objections to the plans frankly none of which ask for anything other we want more information more information more information most importantly through that process judge and lay them thoroughly vetted every single issue that at least now complains about  confirmation because the standard here is that what we're going to do with this case a standard is a good judge lay the make any mistakes did he do anything implausible illogical or not supported by fact yes or no in the following sense what is the overall luck if you give if you allow that nondestructive a planned exercise its rights here i mean i think it's because in your favor to some extent nobody else gets anything right that's the bottom line so let's talk let's talk now about the injunction yes right ok so let's let's talk about the injunction and what's the purpose of the injunction injunction as a law hamilton to earn a living for five years repay what he can get his injunction at the end of the five years and then deal with the lead at the end of this thing he has paid only three hundred thousand dollars in a secured claim to have a secured claim in the house here i paid a substantial amount of that and they're getting paid a dividend during the planning process at the end i think i think in fact going to be owed quite a bit more at the end of the process i mean to get two or three million dollars about that from the beginning we're looking for a distinction between hawkins and the jurors that's a lot of cases and i remain hopeful and confident that will convince the panel to go with the hawkins line my point is not a fait accompli and to your point in terms of talking to counsel it doesn't affect the analysis here when we're talking about good faith i'm talking about were you know the bankruptcy code is enormously disruptive the people's rights we begin every analysis what what are people state law rights how does the bankruptcy code change that and what's the reason for changing that and so i mean we were presented with a plan that creates some entity out here the judge let them stop worrying about at some point we'll come back to that in the second i'm just just bear with me ok this room and that creates an injunction that is nowhere to be found in of said the fact that it's not prohibited means you can do it has the effect of paying six point five percent to a bunch of unsecured creditors who have no other options holds off the holder of an enormous nanda chargeable crime doesn't pay them very much and allows other things to happen in the penumbra of this that might in the real world might give you a shot in five years of making a different kind of payment but that's entirely the debtor's option so i mean i look at this plan and i ask myself what bankruptcy purpose is being served here and when you look at all those factors well there's quite a bit of money the volume is percentages are skewed because the size of the leak land rights damage you call it six percent most people will make this amount of money in a lifetime business and he could not be the one business that has a hope of getting a leak a c that i'm going to agree with you on that i mean the striking thing about this from a legal perspective is they can both drive your client out of business and get paid is one of the her here in the record judge to leave them live with this case for three tortures years we went through five iterations of the plan but only because of additional information requests primarily as that was going on there was very expensive litigation going on  elite and yes they had to keep up with that data one if someone said there could be a million dollars in litigation fees coming into this chapter eleven no one in their right mind would say yeah let's do that instead of saying oh let's put that money and so on but it's three and a half years later that that realization comes around and frankly the hamiltons credit they're still funding the very plan and probably slightly improved on the percentages that they could have done at the very beginning so the good faith issue i would proffer is completely resolved one the court made a finding to supported by the record of the plan in that it does everything the code requires it to do found an outside source to pay adman's found a way to pay those so he could still make the distribution require the creditors the coded a minimum under eleven a fifteen it's that dividend it's the disposable earnings that are supposed to go into the plan hamilton have little or no nonexempt property going into this and he did all that they both did that  frankly and at the end of the day elites rights are unaffected they want to go after their judgment they can go after that judgment it's not a fait accompli it's not it's a non sequitur to say of course there's a need for reorganization liquidation of the end of this california claims there is a process for that it's going to play out it doesn't mean he has to go in and reorganize i think that's one of probably the only interesting question raised by this appeal because frankly just lay them did a remarkable job of not only analyzing every issue the injunction the new value contribution the record is replete with factual findings and evidence supporting what the judge did the elite is asking you to do those to say if there's a big enough not just chargeable judgement at the end of this you need to alter the priority scheme of chapter eleven and here is why you can't confirm they're saying if there is a significant non historical judgment at the end of this what that means is the debtor is not work hard to pay that not historical judgement within the plant the code says no within the plan you have to pay administrative claims you have to pay taxes you have to pay the things with administrative priority the code provides if you've got an artist chartable jasmine and if the judge exercise their discretion to put an injunction and it's chapter eleven says you can't get a you can't get an injunction will find one here so what what what should the judge have been looking at to determine that it is just an injunction was appropriate is the cases that are cited as counsel pointed out and they're very different economics so what reorganization and here's it leads interest it's going to get paid most of the money going to the states for five years and its interests are hard at the end because they're going to whatever the not historical judgment is at the end they're going to get paid so balancing those of exercised so i have twenty seven seconds so if there are other questions or concerns i could go there's obviously a lot here and i understand that i think what the court needs to understand is the hamiltons very frankly had to face up to reality back in tw fifteen fourteen they chose to do so by going into the bankruptcy system to do what they could do to pay creditors and it has cost them dearly they have put a lot of money and they've devoted the next four years of their lives to this plan there's no argument that's not good faith or the you have three minutes and forty nine seconds thank you first let me say that there is nothing in the plan that requires you leave it's not affordable claim at the end of the plan where is that in the in the code i'm just reacting to council statement your honor there's there's he indicated that elite would get paid at the end of the point i think it was could but i mean where is but i mean you make much of that factory lead but where is that in the code well i guess i would analogize it your honor to the numbers george will tax claims where there is a prescribe treatment we're not entitle to that but it's the same concept here it's the same policy that where there is a non dischargeable claim you've got to pay it's got to get paid somehow but that's not the requirement of the test and eleven twenty nine that's that is what that is the balancing act that was done by mercado and brought in your honor both of those cases to the injunction with respect the injunction right so you have no problem with this plan if there's no injunction i think i've the plan is much less problematic if there is no injunction i do think that the plan itself is is in bad faith i also wanted to address this briefly of on my the assets of the of the debtor should have been on the balance sheet of the debtor before hand they are in it's not new value during the plan or during the bankruptcy case prior to confirmation i believe that the what would what you would see if there was a promissory note that it had been in the fall preposition and with pressure brought to bear on that creditor they decided to pay up in connection with the plan that's not new value because that asset was on the books before the bankruptcy and we look at the at the new value cases there has to be a change in the balance sheet where was the change all that happened here was an asset went from being an asset that was a can track school right to be reimbursed it became cash it's still an asset it didn't there's nothing new happened it would be like having a car tha worth ten thousand dollars and selling it during the case and turn it into cash it's there's no effect on the balance just so i keep the housekeeping straight and that was an agreement that was not a preposition agreement you have stronger and it was it was assumed the circumstances here this is a bad faith case it started out bad faith when they stole the business it continued with a plan that stretches out eight and a half year essentially free bond the payments are de minimus and i think we have to look at that and consider that and if that means that the debtor camp can't get a plan cannot satisfy all of the twenty nine and get a confirm plan that's what it