withdraw in the record we learn a trial that it's supposedly a cashier's check but before that it deposition we asked that debtor what was this  he says he doesn't know what the check is for but his account does that's right that's what he said at the trial of deposition and then the deposition transcripts in the record he  says ok if you look at page eighty five i see a withdrawal of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars or two thousand and sixteen answer yes question can you tell me what it is for answer i know and i disclosed it to a trustee but i can't remember right  says for advertising drawn through a cashier's check doesn't know was written to but not fake was not improperly drawn that's right in the in the problem with that is we don't know where it went in and a well but the problem now is that it is and it's very specific you have a bankruptcy judge who's sitting right there at the hearing who knows what the situation is and who is able to go through this what is my standard or view as a relates to what the bankruptcy judge decides on a new piece you and the other where we want to clear ok so in this case on clear air you had your shot to give the bankruptcy judge all the arguments you're giving to me i looked exactly at what he said a trial i saw what he said in the deposition but really that's just us that's just if you will argumentative as to what they were really was the ledger shows withdrawals of eight hundred million one hundred and one thousand four hundred and twenty two out about the same dive for the same thing so based on that i'm that's what seemed to be in the complaint the court went through the records and said no problem in my book with a separate step the largest entry in two hundred and fifty thousand dollars is clearly mature look this that or had over five meetings with  trustees so that the books were not were not clear ensure perhaps the better was able to explain some of them but not this one and a cashier's check is inherently suspicious somebody bought it when you get just a minute we had two similar with rolls later one hundred and forty zero now they're four hundred and ten one thousand four hundred and twenty two they're about the same time there for the same reason advertising promotion answer on the two hundred and fifty thousand i know he said no problem but without addressing the two hundred and fifty thousand the largest withdraw those other withdrawals were explained one went to the bank in nigeria we know the answer there but two hundred and fifty thousand dollars vanished and that's not fair that's not an honest debtor who had eight months to tell us where the money and it doesn't doesn't answer that and you know the inri rex case talks about you can't just nec use was even debtor is there a trustee was given records twenty thousand pages of documents and presumably somewhere in there it would have explained it here there's not any explanation for where that money and well i'm some surprise  last nd issue ok let's talk more about the st issue the court was right about that because we have a statement by the debtor saying the list is worth one million dollars and that is at d r three o six he says he built email list valued at one million dollars this is the only asset that's worth anything in this bankruptcy and if you look at excerpt of record to ten you'll see there's three assets list one is an internet domain ultimate freedom advanced a contest zero do you understand all of the buyout came out the other way on this yeah well i don't understand i think i think well you understand what they sabbath yes they said ok your tough issue in the hands of the trustee this asset wasn't worth anything more than seven hundred and seventy eight dollars that's what they said that's right in a sad there's no evidence in the record be clear air the bat made her the support for the trial court's decision assessing the credibility of the debtor is that she determined he lived and she determined he lied because this asset made among other things she has several reasons but one is bankruptcy get paid one hundred and thirty eight thousand dollars it's undisputed by both parties that if you're not using your own email list you have to pay fifty percent of the sales to a rd party if there ever was or ever of value which the bankruptcy judge agreed with he didn't find well maybe mr shu gart she said it you know he sounds right there's a except the seventy seven thousand eight hundred and sixty and because there is no value in there that gives us any different than that all arrest give values but nobody said that there was it was this barrier that  therefore it was an abuse of discretion for the bankruptcy judge to do what they did and how do you respond to that that's not true because of the bankruptcy if the trustee had known it was worth one hundred thousand dollars to show us it could have negotiated w jealous or the debtor in hell out of the way and if it had allowed the way it would have got seventy thousand dollars getting fifty percent of the proceeds from the value of the list is how often the list you see in so it could change but you're going to get fifty percent of the sales from the list he got one one hundred and forty thousand dollars within eight months of the bankruptcy protection that's real money that's seventy thousand dollars to the owner of that list and mr schultz under customer practice in this industry the in the pay to use the less it would cost in fifty thousand dollars to use it in the st instance he has a duty to secure all information with the trustee if he's an honest debtor yes to disclose and well everything so he should have disclosed you know what i think this list is worth a lot of money to me and that would have allowed the trustee to negotiate with them instead he picks some made up value that the court doesn't believe has any basis and on it in how he arrived at in so in a sense the baptists flipping you've got to turn your mike on as to what the list should be sold for that was under the in the context that the debtor gave it in a web nor selling the internet product with people could create their own list it was simply showing them what he could what he has earned on  y list that he built and might but again you're missing the point here what's the standard or review for the bankruptcy judge it's clear so the bankruptcy judge hearing all  other folks could get fifty percent of the sales from a marketing campaign the business paid one one hundred and thirty eight thousand make it from april two thousand and seventeen to make two thousand and eighteen sugared says a worse list and what the trustee could sell the property for well as exactly right we've got all these values in there six months earlier he says it's worth a one million for him then we've got these other things that i've reported to y it seems to me that if gives a clear error for the for bankruptcy court to say this is not right well the bankruptcy court has to has to consider the context of that the value was given and well i understand the context but if a big if the business can make a one hundred and thirty eight thousand dollars after it sugar could say there's a twelve thousand dollars made to be made on a worse list i guess i and he says it's worth a one million before i'm having a tough time understanding how i could say that the trustee that there's no competent or plausible evidence that the customer learned or the more in the hands of the trust state i'm having a tough time understanding claire on that well the b list is basically selling a brand it's selling the  that any rd party that's selling it will not have george schultz involved and all so clear error the bottom line is involved but a trustee with those same particular things is not going to make more than seven hundred and seventy eight bucks when he says six months earlier could have made a one million the business makes one hundred and thirty eight thousand afterwards i'm having a tough time how that was clear air the bankruptcy is a baptist mind it seems to me they missed a standard or a view well i think they pointed out that st of all even if there was a false oath he still was mentally disabled during this period of time and so he wouldn't have the fraudulent intent or that or the knowledge based on the court's own findings that the that in the other cases of items that were left from this petition so wrong as it seems seems a little difficult in that it seems like this is a little bit different situation than those that dealt with say the check the check was one thing one cut of em forgotten this one could've done something this was the whole case here well the whole case actually should rest more more than anything else his mental state of mind when these actions took place and when he filled out his petition the the trial court the bankruptcy court found that he didn't have the and the fact that he used the list afterwards and murdered one hundred and thirty eight thousand that was the list being used by himself it was being used by a rd party so that's not a good judge of what the trustee could sell it for and the idea that the trustee could rent it out to a reason the trustee abandoned this was not because of its value but because there was an ongoing litigation over its ownership and secondly because it involved confidential and private information so what it w no he's not ok and other times but this was a particularly bad time because of the stress element which aggravates the p t s d the the disassociated disorder the multiple faces that are parts of self that is such an insidious disease especially with the three of them combining that it can render him as he said somewhat accurate i suspect based on the the therapist testified he was like a zombie you know he keys he couldn't concentrate he couldn't they didn't have clarity the judge found he couldn't connect the dots i mean it's a horrible case of what a human being is a disabled human beings going through in the situation but it does  flow but during these critical periods of time there's no indication that he was anything but mentally disabled well let listless think about that there was a time when the trustee values the as low and abandoned it and he made no offer to try to even get it then there was another time when you file the district court lawsuit to acquire ownership of the list and claim their value what was there a district court lawsuit filed there was there was a district court he didn't hear a choir the ownership of the last and claim their value highest trial no there's never been a trial this was interrupted by the bankruptcy there's never been  the chapter seven is a liquidation is not to reach stablish a business and be organizing continue operating a business that the rent list out would be fine the face of the purpose of a chapter seven it would not make any sense  no product to sale any rd party would have the same problems with the with this lawsuit for fighting for ownership of the list in the confidential issues there is no relationship that's kind of a key factor here is that in this affiliate marketing niche that they are in a relationship of the list owner to his members of the list is paramount that's one of the contextual questions that the judge missed so that the  the people respond on the list to the owner of the list with the relationship to a rd party it's basically spam and they're just going to go in there their spam voters and so it's not going to be a a money making proposition and certainly there's nobody ever established a value anywhere in here other than what was the position value for the for these lists that the credit the biggest problem of the biggest problem you have with me is that even have to people on the list for a one hundred times more likely to buy a problem joerg that others might have been who might buy from others like the trustee and selling items on the list even at a one hundred times more likely to buy it your vibe from jordan the fair market value would be ten thousand dollars and its value to add seven hundred and anywhere offered a little bit but just a minute six months earlier he said it was a one million and he did say that it's there a one hundred times more likely to want to buy high for me than they are from other he was not selling the list in the web your honor he was he was selling the type of program that they could use to as with people that have relationships with him out i do see that we have lost your drawings and i'm on the lookout for when she pops back in are you still there richard yes yes i'm on the phone with judge robinson right now we're trying to get her on by phone into the back into the this call judge ok because you've only to go to twenty nine left and then we can take a few comments from the other side nav judge or all of that rate the transcript i'm happy to do that if that if the court i'm good i'm good we don't know we have to wait for i guess not i have no authority to do what i'm trying i'm just trying to help you lawyers so you don't have to sit on the phone wait just knows we need to him know you don't e that the reason is the trustee of band it is clearly stated and exhibit thirty seven as we are number six hundred and ninety nine that had nothing to do with the value of the of the items it was because of  the ownership litigation and because of the privacy of the confidential so the judge that was a clear mistake that the judge made and i think that's a big factor of what the baffle looked at to determine that this case  with the list is critical that the one million dollars figure was at a different time different place that it was an offering to list for sale it was offering a program where they could build their own list as jordan had done over time with customers or people just it was web north that he established a relationship with and it's that relationship even though judge smith did bring up a good point that maybe there's the actual amount that someone could earn from in the future might be notice to the trustee furthermore the th circuit is in a in in re rats lack of injury by creditors is relevant in purposes of denying this charge and even though the transfer there didn't harm me estate the fact that the debtor lied about it was a basis to deny the just are similar here in terms of mr assurances mental state the court found he was highly intelligent sophisticated and as a as has been observed there were multiple amendments here he could have changed his mind any time he thinks something the truck let him off the hook he's had moments of lucidity he is very intelligent he's still making money he could have corrected it we still would have challenged it but he could've corrected he doesn't do that the mental and mental state is a red herring here he thinks a seven hundred and seventy dollars corrupt and it's not an addition you know the valuation to mr sholes personally it was a fact that should have been disclosed to the trustee recess until nine thirty tomorrow morning