this case boils down to several propositions the case was automatically this is an adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy court that was automatically dismissed  not abrogate the bankruptcy courts statutorily impose duty of review of attorney fees then by definition a bankruptcy court does not have discretion case the underlying chapter thirteen was dismissed wanted need here all the court the bankruptcy court issued a one sentence order dismissing the adversary proceeding based soley upon the fact that the underlying case was dismissed the thing was stated a long time ago by chief justice john marshall i don't of the assets of the estate ultimately for one reason or another the chapter thirteen the two thousand and sixteen chapter thirteen case was dismissed as appears as in the this can be found in the application for attorney's fees by mr murray's bankruptcy attorney in the two thousand and sixteen  case he states that he requested or that he discussed turning over the personal injury suit proceeds to the bankruptcy estate in furthermore the proposed plan for that estate states in paragraph c c section five says any any proceeds or damages recovered by around the half of the debtor shall be retained pending order of the bankruptcy court well like i say the case the underlying or the two thousand and sixteen chapter thirteen case was dismissed and let me step back while it was still pending long before it was dismissed the personal injury a turn i settled the case in wayne county circuit court but did nothing did nothing to actually get the proceeds dispersed by  allstate insurance and the evidence would show if the case is allowed to proceed that allstate insurance company wrote the check the settlement check around i wan vernacular in the brief basically the personal injury attorney did nothing did not do the take the necessary steps to place questions so your argument argument is basically at the time of the two thousand and sixteen chapter thirteen repayment to its mission was filed mr murray has this claim  against this other party allstate apparently and that claim then gets results in in state court and is your argument is that some of that was property of the state that's sixty well that claim which ended up being a settlement of sixty one thousand dollars your argument was is that that was property of the estate yes and that and that property of the state as you argue would have to be minister essentially in the in the chapter thirteen case yes ok some point to chapter thirteen case did get dismissed them appears that mr murray had cereal thirteen cases that didn't complete for one reason thousand dollars to the chapter thirteen trustee or the estate and somehow it was your response if that's the argument well there is a response or there is a requirement because once schultz requested turnover of the proceeds to the chapter thirteen estate then the burden will was on the personal injury lawyer to turn it over nets right out of the six circuit in re sharon case the onus that's not my word that's the word from the case the burden was on the personal injury  over and when it comes down to mung other things is without you simply can't wait out a case there otherwise there's no incentive chapter thirteen case the debtor has the same powers as the trustee the point is judge rhodes discussed that this flies in the face of incentives for a debtor and obviously the debtors attorney to comply with the law in this case the marshalling of assets of the bankruptcy case is there any difference in how we should view chapter seven and chapter thirteen cases and so preserving you've got trustee a planet in the case goes forward in the trustee administers all property in the estate chapter thirteen cases as mr murray's often get dismissed after a month or two or three because the debtor is not complying with the plan for one reason or another is there so we look at this any differently in terms of turn over obligation of the attorney handling the injury case to turn property over to the estate which i mean he's probably going to argue no longer no longer was an estate no there is no difference i don't have a citation off the top of my head but but the cases all across the country state that a chapter thirteen debtor has basically been set is is a debtor in possession just like chapter eleven and they have the pantomime to being a trustee it has the same same  otherwise what incentive is there for a debtor and by definition the debtors attorney who are charged with marshalling assets of an estate to comply with the law assets as i see it time is expired but could you just take a few seconds to to make clear what relief you're so you're sitting at what is it that you would like this court to i think it's pretty simple  for the reason stated before before even an answer was filed so it's not like we're arguing a twelve b motion or a or a rule fifty six summary judgment motion  presented mr murray presented direct evidence that a request for turnover was made the direct evidence being found in the his previous bankruptcy lawyers there were four or five components to the settlement that was twenty three thousand dollars that was to be distributed to medical providers there was twenty two thousand hours that was mr safer see there and the case held that medical providers had an independent at independence standing to bring an action against an insurer for payment of no fault that sets in other words they had a direct right of the the medical insurance carrier needs to cause an order to be entered in the state court providing for a distribution of the settlement proceeds of the no fault benefits to be paid under the settlement to  the medical providers and if the if the insurer does that then it has no worry about settling a case and then and then having twelve medical providers sue it all over are all over the detroit the tri county area or wherever so the case was settled on that premise that these medical providers would be l asked for a remission of the entire sixty one thousand hour settlement that's kind of absurd if you win the assets not what happens when ask for the attorney to send his attorney's fees to the trust the or the  do when they've got this request well there are reasons not in the records for why oh why an order is not answer right away but let's assume that mr safer law answered the order  the twenty three thousand dollars the trustee well it would have an extent of this order it would have been personally liable it would have been light for the twenty three thousand dollars probably would have been subject to an attorney the claim and the to i mean the reasons if you ask i'll tell you that that plaintiff's plaintiff was refusing to sign his waiver of of future benefits which was a condition of the settlements and he that the money is sixty one thousand dollars proposed to be a course in in various ways and the bankruptcy court will have a chance to rule upon that i mean that's what happens that i would assume in most settlements distinction i just want to say that there are all sorts of other reasons why this case should be dismissed claims have been abandoned claims there's no standing for the and then i just want to make sure you  that chicago the fulton which is the supreme court case that was a cite in january clearly clearly disposes of plaintiff's automatic stay cli know why the district court did it other than the district court said because the bankrupt the chapter thirteen and been dismissed therefore i'm going to dismiss the eb to siri proceeding but there's no real there's no other reason well that's not mr quite that has no standing for that purpose or no stand in for any of this and so is asking for a for a judgment in favor of a two thousand and sixteen bankruptcy case  count one he didn't appeal that you ban it count one which seeks to set aside the two thousand and sixteen bankruptcy court dismissal order and so where does he were does he go where does that were does the money go spanking that would have been a settlement there was no money to turn for he wasn't ever going to have possession of any property that he could turn over during the pendency of this rd bankruptcy of six that were all in my view bad faith and you could you take it you could take  there are i think dissension between a thirteen in a sense very important i think the fact that there are only was a quest for twenty three thousand dollars to be turned over is very important i think the legal  is a debtor in possession just like a chapter eleven for a corporation is a debtor in possession and a have they also have the right to demand  turnover of estate assets this claim against allstate was clearly listed as an asset of the estate was it listed your thirteen so basically what the personal injury lawyer did in this case was basically usurped the job of the debtors bankruptcy lawyer making all these decisions for him about whether or not he should turn over the proceeds of the estate one as mr schultz requested him to do so that's why the onus as stated in re sharon the six circuit said that once a request for turnover has been made the onus is upon the party in possession of the property to come into bankruptcy court and object to it and in this case presumably at that point mr safer would make all these arguments that he's  bootstrapping at this point ok he doesn't get to just sit there in end not do anything once requested by the debtors attorney to turn over according to enter a sharon  once once mr schultz requested turnover of the of the assets then it was incumbent on mr safer the personal injury lawyer to either turn it over or file an objection and make all these arguments to the bankruptcy court but i think it was judge clay that was discussing isn't it something for the bankruptcy court to sort out isn't that why appellate is doing in by arguing that is making the proverbial oh he was a difficult client argument which the court in in re marion gave short shrift to  asking for approval of his fees to be reviewed by a bankruptcy court and as i mentioned earlier in my argument the proposed plan paragraph c c section five of the proposed plan specifically stated any proceeds or damages recovered by herb and behalf of the debtor shall be retained pending order of the bankruptcy court which goes back to judge clay's a lad questioning isn't this something for the bankruptcy court to have sorted out it's certainly not sorted out by automatically dismissing a case for which is as is confusing as it might appear to be in re wallah bert six circuit case from two thousand and nineteen allows for bringing a violation of automatic stay in a believe turned over proceeds action in a moment from a improve previous chapter thirteen case in a subset that had been dismissed in a subsequent case so as confusing as it appears it's not unheard of if that mr fine go and i ask this question to the other side i mean there's not a lot of money involved in this case no i just always explore it when we have a case it's not really a lot of money at stake i mean to the attorney fees in this case are going to exceed whatever well you can imagine the you've got her in the insurer and the insured have sharply different whatever the court but if it may be that you may want to reach out to the mediation officer you know i can let them know that you're at least amenable to mediation seem to be some really fundamental parties would have i'll give you seven days from today to stop submit just anything you want to submit these two intervening decisions thank you kindly for your patience and yeah i do you know i think you should at least consider mediation and some other give no objection maybe to me just reaching out to our mediation officer to reach out to you