B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET

(Instructions on Reverse)

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER

(Court Use Only)

PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) ATTORNEYS (If Known)

PARTY (Check One Box Only)

□ Debtor □ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin

□ Creditor □ Other

□ Trustee

PARTY (Check One Box Only)

□ Debtor □ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin

□ Creditor □ Other

□ Trustee

CAUSE OF ACTION (WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)

NATURE OF SUIT

(Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.)

FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property 

□11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property

□12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference

□13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer 

□14-Recovery of money/property - other

FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien 

□21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property

FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property

□31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h)

FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge

□41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e)

FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation

□51-Revocation of confirmation

FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability

□66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims

□62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, 

actual fraud

□67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny

(continued next column)

FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)

□61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support

□68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury

□63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan

□64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation 

 (other than domestic support)

□65-Dischargeability - other

FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief

□ 71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay

□ 72-Injunctive relief – other

FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest

□ 81-Subordination of claim or interest

FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment

□ 91-Declaratory judgment

FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action

□ 01-Determination of removed claim or cause

Other

□ SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.

□ 02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court 

if unrelated to bankruptcy case)

□ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23

□ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint Demand $

Other Relief Sought

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 11
B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)

BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES

NAME OF DEBTOR BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.

DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING DIVISION OFFICE NAME OF JUDGE

RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY)

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT ADVERSARY 

PROCEEDING NO.

DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING DIVISION OFFICE NAME OF JUDGE

SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF)

DATE PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF)

INSTRUCTIONS

The filing of a bankruptcy case creates an “estate” under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of 

all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the 

jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be 

lawsuits concerning the debtor’s discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary 

proceeding.

A party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding 

Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court’s Case Management/Electronic 

Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When 

completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the 

information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.

The cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings 

or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff’s attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an 

attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.

Plaintiffs and Defendants. Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint. 

Attorneys. Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.

Party. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.

Demand. Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.

Signature. This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the 

plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an 

attorney, the plaintiff must sign.

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 11
Counsel for the Plaintiff

Brett Alexander Zwerdling, VBN 39569 

Charles E. Adams, VBN 37181 

Zwerdling, Oppleman & Adams 

5020 Monument Avenue 

Richmond, VA 23230 

Phone 804-355-5719 Fax 804-355-1597 

bzwerdling@zandolaw.com

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

Richmond Division 

In re: David W. Edwards, 

 Debtor. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 18-32068-KRH

Chapter 7 

AP No.: _________ 

Mary Crossland, 

 

 Plaintiff 

v. 

David W. Edwards. 

 Defendant. 

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Mary Crossland (hereinafter “Crossland”), by counsel, and 

for her complaint objecting to the dischargeability of her claim against David W. Edwards 

(hereinafter "Edwards" respectfully represents as follows:

1. Jurisdiction of this Court over the instant adversary proceeding is based upon 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157 because this action arises in and relates to the bankruptcy case of the 

Debtor, a chapter 7 case, converted from a Chapter 13 in this Court on May 2, 2018. 

2. This proceeding is a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(I). 

3. That the Debtor, DAVID EDWARDS, (hereinafter “Edwards”), owned and 

operated Estates by David, LLC (hereinafter “Estates by David”), a limited liability company 

licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia though the State Corporation 

Commission. See exhibit A attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 11
2 

4. That Edwards operated Estates by David from its primary business location at 7355 

Penrith Drive, Mechanicsville, Virginia 23116, in the County of Hanover, Commonwealth of 

Virginia. 

5. That Edwards executed a contract on behalf of Estates by David on the 12th day of 

May 2015 with the Petitioner, MARY CROSSLAND (hereinafter “Crossland”) for the estate 

sale service to include the following: A. Organizing items to be sold in the house, garage, sheds 

and yard. B. Appraising and pricing items to be sold. C. Conducting a tag sale onsite. D. 

Providing a sales summary with settlement three weeks after the sale, but sales are not itemized. 

See exhibit B attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

6. That Edwards agreed upon behalf of Estates by David to provide these estate sale 

service to Crossland to sell thousands of pieces of jewelry previously owned by her deceased 

mother. See exhibits B and C attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

7. That on or about the 27th day of May 2015, Edwards advertised on his page at 

facebook.com that: “Estates by David LLC will be conducting a Estate Jewelry Sale on Friday, 

June 5. All of this Jewelry belonged to a Doctors Wife who could not resist buying a nice piece 

of Jewelry! There are Thousands of Pieces to choose from! Fine Pieces !! Necklaces, bracelets, 

pins, pendants, rings, and other pieces! This sale will be by appointment only starting at 10am 

and last appointment at 4pm. Since the sale is being held in our Home, we have narrowed the 

number of people per appointment to 8 people every 30 minutes. The 10 and 10:30 slots are 

closed. But other times are available. This Jewelry will be priced to be offered for Sale! Go to 

Estatesales.net to view many pieces that will be offered for sale! Email or Facebook us with 

your appointment time or call (804) 723-4121! So much to see, and lots to purchase!!” See

exhibit C. 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 11
3 

8. That Edward’s page on Facebook.com also displayed at least approximately twentyeight (28) separate digital images of numerous pieces of the aforementioned jewelry. See exhibit 

C. 

9. That Crossland had provided to Edwards and Estates by David all the thousands of 

pieces of jewelry described by Edward’s Facebook.com advertisement and shown in the digital 

images pursuant to the May 12, 2015 contract between the parties. See exhibits B and C. 

10. That, upon information and belief, Edwards and Estates by David conducted the 

estate jewelry sale on the 5th day of June 2015, as provided in the May 12, 2015 contract between 

the parties, and as advertised on Edwards page on facebook.com. See exhibits B and C. 

11. That, on the 7th day of June, 2015, Edwards sent an email from 

estatesbydavid@comcast.net to Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net informing her, inter alia, “We 

had your Jewelry Sale on Friday by appointment and I think it was a great success! It was fun 

and people really love going thru all the pieces and purchased also. Don’t have actual amount 

we took in but will have it in the next few days.” See exhibit D attached hereto, and 

incorporated herein by reference. 

12. That the pieces of jewelry provided by Crossland to Edwards and Estates by David 

pursuant to the May 12, 2015, contract included at least the following. See exhibit C. 

13. That, as of the date of this filing of this Complaint, Crossland has received neither 

any monies in settlement of the estate jewelry sale nor a return of any of the aforementioned 

pieces of jewelry form Edwards and/or Estates by David. 

COUNT I: BREACH OF CONTRACT

14. That Crossland hereby incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through 

eleven (11) supra.

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 11
4 

15. That the May 12, 2015, Contract between the parties requires that Estates by David 

would provide Crossland a Sale Summary with settlement within three weeks after the jewelry 

estate sale. See exhibit B. 

16. That the May 12, 2015, contract between the parties further provides that Estates 

by David would receive a fee of thirty-five percent (35%) of the fair market value of the pieces 

of jewelry sold at the jewelry estate sale with Crossland receiving a settlement of the remaining 

sixty-five percent (65%) of the sale. See exhibit B. 

17. That neither Edwards nor any other employee and/or agent of Estates by David ever 

informed Crossland that any of the pieces of jewelry described supra and provided for the estate 

jewelry sale remained unsold after the 5th day of June 2015. 

18. That Estates by David has materially breached the May 12, 2015, Contract between 

the parties by failing to provide Crossland with a Sale Summary with Settlement within three (3) 

weeks after the sale on the 5th day of June 2015, or up to the date of the filing of this cause of 

action. See exhibit B. 

19. That, as of the date of the filing of this Complaint, neither Edwards nor any other 

employee and/or agent of Estates by David has either paid Crossland any monies owed to her 

under the May 12, 2015, Contract between the parties, or returned a single piece of the jewelry 

described supra. See exhibits B, C and D. 

20. That, upon information and belief, the monies due to Crossland from Estates by 

David pursuant to the May 12, 2015, Contract is approximately $ 3,916.90 based on sixty-five 

percent (65%) share of the estate jewelry sale conducted by Estates by David on or about the 5th

day of June 2015. See exhibit B. 

21. That the State Corporation Commission of the Commonwealth of Virginia cancelled 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 11
5 

the status of Estates by David on the 31st day of July 2016; and, upon information and belief, 

Edwards was the last owner of any interest in that limited liability company, and the last holder 

of the company’s assets. 

COUNT II: FRAUD

22. That Crossland hereby incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs one (1) through 

nineteen (19) supra.

23. That as set forth supra in paragraph nine (9), Edwards sent Crossland an email 

informing her of the “...great success” of the estate jewelry sale of the pieces of jewelry pursuant 

to the May 12, 2015, Contract between the parties. See exhibit B and D. 

24. That Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net wrote an 

email to Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net on the 25th day of June 2015, claiming: “///just 

wanted to give you the totals of your two sales we conducted for you. The first sale in your 

home was $1925, and the jewelry sale was $4101. I thing they were both great sales. We will be 

working on these to put together a sales summary for each and checks. We will try and get this 

done ASAP. We have been very busy and thankful for how busy we are!!...” See exhibit E 

attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

25. That Edwards also solicited Crossland’s cooperation in have Sharon consider a 

jewelry sale similar to that done on behalf of Crossland and, furthermore, promised to “...touch 

base with you this week...” about her proceeds from the estate jewelry sale. See exhibit D. 

26. That Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net sent an email 

to Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net on the 10th day of August 2015 informing her “working on 

your records presumable the Sales Summary with Settlement but slower these days !! Haven’t 

forgotten you!” See exhibit F attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 11
6 

27. That Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net then sent an 

email to Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net on the 20th day of September 2015, further informing 

her: “I just want you to know that we are working on your two sales and will hopefully get them 

together for you within the next few weeks.” See exhibit G attached hereto, and incorporated 

herein by reference. 

28. That, after several months with no communication from either Edwards or anyone 

from Estates by David, Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net inquired by email to Edwards at 

estatesbydavid@comcast.net with the query: “I really hate to bother you but do you have the 

checks ready?” and Edwards replied by email the same day: “Sorry for the long delay:...But I 

am trying to get caught up in the next few weeks. Thank you for being so patient with me.” See 

exhibit H attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

29. That, after more than another quarter 1⁄4 of a year had passed without any 

communication form either Edwards, and/or Estates by David, Crossland at 

mcc214@verizon.net inquired by email to Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net on the 2nd

day of April 2016: “I am checking in to see where you are with the payment for the two estate 

sales. I would appreciate knowing when to expect payment.” Edwards responded by email that 

same date: “Hey Mary! Just retiring from from by business since my health problems still 

continuing but improving! Retiring now will allow me to strengthen our my clients accounts! 

Thanks for being so patient! I will be spending time on your account!” See exhibit I attached 

hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

30. That many more months passes without either payment or communication from 

Edwards and/or Estates by David in this regard, and Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net sent a 

firm demand on the 3rd day of August 2016, by email to Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 11
7 

as follows: “As you are aware I have not received payment from the Estate Sales that you 

conducted on my personal property in 2015. It is over a year now and I cannot wait any longer 

for this payment. This is my last attempt to personally ask for the money from the two sales. 

The total amount is $6026. Please send a check to me by Friday, August 12, 2016.” See exhibit 

J attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

31. That Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net responded 

the next day to Crossland’s email form the 3rd day of August 2016, from mcc214@verizon.net

with more excuses: “Hey Mary. I am sorry for the long delay in getting you paid. The company 

was closed due to financial problem that have been on going for the past two years due to my 

illness. The shop closed a year ago in March, and the Estate Sale Business closed this this past 

March. I am working with my Lawyer to try and work out payment to you! This has been a 

very hard two years fro me, and my illness created hardship on me personally and for the 

business. I am trying hard to bring right to this situation. You have been create client and friend 

to work with, and I am so embarrassed about this situation. Working 35 years in this business 

has been great, but having not been up to the task in the past two years has has created this 

hardship! I am working in this problem and try to resolve it soon.” See exhibit J. 

32. That Crossland at mcc214@verizon.net made a final email 

demand to Edwards at estatesbydavid@comcast.net on the 4th day of August 2016: “David, 

Please let you attorney know that I will need the check by Friday August 12th.” Edwards refused 

to comply with the following email responses on the same day: “I will not have the funds by 

Friday August 12. There is no money in the closed business. I am working to arrange a way to 

pay my debts outstanding. I am not sure when the funds will available. But trying to get this 

situation. See exhibit K attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 11
8 

33. That Edwards’ emails to Crossland were intended to foster in Crossland false 

impression that Edwards and/or Estates by David intended to honor the contractual obligations 

contained in the May 12, 2015, Contract between the parties. 

34. That Edwards’ emails repeatedly falsely promised Crossland that she would receive 

payment on the May 12, 2015, contract between the parties in the near future following the date 

of the communication; but Crossland has received nothing whatsoever from either Edwards 

and/or Estates by David more than one and on-half (1 1⁄2) years since the jewelry estate sale, and 

long past the three (3) weeks required by the aforesaid contact. See exhibits D,E,F,G,H,I,J, and 

K. 

35. That Edwards’ email of the 25th day of June 2015 to Crossland falsely describes a 

total receipt of Six Thousand Twenty-Six Dollars and No Cents ($6,026.00) for the sale of 

“...Thousands of Pieces ...” of jewelry, but the sale of that many pieces of jewelry as described 

supra must result in receipts of a much greater magnitude. See exhibit E. 

36. That nevertheless Edwards nor any agent and/or employee of Estates by David ever 

informed Crossland that any pieces of jewelry provided for sale pursuant to the May 12, 2015, 

contract between the parties remained unsold after the jewelry estate sale on the 5th day of June 

2015, but the total receipt of Four Thousand One Hundred One Dollars and No Cents 

($4,101.00) communicated by Edwards to Crossland could not account for the sale of all those 

thousands of pieces of jewelry. 

37. That Crossland’s share of the sale of the “...Thousands of Pieces...” of jewelry, or 

their return unsold, was a material term to the May 12, 2015, contract between the parties. 

38. That Edwards’ email to Crossland after the jewelry estate sale on the 5th day of June 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 10 of 11
9 

2015 were knowingly and intentionally made to Crossland to falsely convince her that she would 

receive her share of the sale pursuant to the May 12, 2015, contract between the parties within 

the near future; that she would only receive a portion of the actual proceeds from the sale that all 

pieces of jewelry provided to Edwards and/or Estates by Dave by Crossland were actually sold; 

and, that, consequently, Crossland needed to take no steps to protect her interests in this regard. 

39. That Edwards intended to mislead Crossland to prevent her from taking any 

immediate steps to protect her interests in this regard until he could shut down Estates by David, 

and then claim the limited liability company had not assets or money. 

40. That Edwards informed Crossland by email that Estates by David on the 4th day of 

August 2016: “There is no money in the closed business.” See exhibit J. 

41. That Crossland reasonable relied on Edwards false representation due to Estates by 

David extensive and effective advertisement of the jewelry estate sale on facebook.com; his 

claims of “great success” from the sale of the pieces of jewelry; the extremely busy nature of 

Estates by David because of all the sales; and the three decades and more longevity of Estates by 

David. 

42. That Edwards false representations caused Crossland to take no action to protect 

her interests until more than one and one-half (1 1⁄2) hears had passed from the jewelry estate sale 

without payment and/or return of the unsold pieces of jewelry, and until after Estates by David 

has ceased doing business. 

43. That Edwards intentional and knowing false representations are demonstrated by 

his repeated emails communications to Crossland promising payment of her share of the sales in 

the near future, and commenting on the many sales conducted by Estates by David; but he later 

acknowledge to Crossland in an email on the 4th day of August 2016 that “...(t)he company was 

Case 18-32068-KRH Doc 33 Filed 08/08/18 Entered 08/08/18 12:24:18 Desc Main

 Document Page 11 of 11