Kimberly A. Chandler, VSB# 47897 

CHANDLER LAW FIRM

P.O. Box 17586 

Richmond, VA 23226 

Office: (804) 353-1971 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

Richmond Division 

 

 

In re: ) Case No: 20-30632-KRH 

Frederick Dewon Cooper ) 

 ) Chapter 13 

 Debtor. ) 

____________________________________) 

 ) 

Frederick Dewon Cooper ) Adversary Pro. 

 ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff. ) 

v. ) 

) 

April A. Zeidan ) 

Defendant. ) 

____________________________________) 

 

COMPLAINT TO AVOID PREFERENTIAL TRANSFER 

AND MOTION FOR TURNOVER 

COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, FREDERICK DEWON COOPER (“Debtor and/or 

Cooper”), the Debtor in possession, acting pursuant to the concurrent powers of the 

Chapter 13 Trustee, Carl M. Bates, by counsel, and for their Complaint state as follows: 

JURISDICTION 

1. This action arises under §§ 522(h), 541, 542, 547, 548, 550(a), 551 and 1306 of 

the Bankruptcy Code. This Court has jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant 

to 11 U.S.C. Section 1303, and 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and 157. This is a core proceeding 

under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(F). 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 7
2. On February 6, 2010, (the “Petition Date”), Plainiff voluntarily filed his petition 

in this Court for relief under Chapter 13 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 

et seq. (the “Code”). 

3. Carl M. Bates was appointed Chapter 13 Trustee for Debtor’s bankruptcy estate 

(“Trustee”) and continues to serve in that capacity. 

FACTS 

4. Among the Plaintiff’s scheduled assets are several horses to which the Plaintiff 

has in interest in upon the date of filing, including Plaintiff’s yearling horse Marley aka 

Spontaneous Decisions (“Marley”) which seized pursuant a Writ of Fieri Facias in 

Detinue (“Writ of Fi Fe Detinue”) issued on February 4, 2020. 

5. On or about January 28, 2020, April A. Zeidan, Creditor, herein after (“Creditor” 

or “Zeidan”) obtained a default judgment against Plaintiff pursuant to a Warrant in Debt 

under Code of Virginia §§ 8.01-470, 8.01-472, for a sum certain of $1,212.00, and costs 

of $61.00, and interest of 6% in the Hanover General District Court (“HGDC”). 

6. Thereafter Plaintiff’s yearling horse Marley aka Spontaneous Decisions 

(“Marley”) was seized pursuant a Writ of Fieri Facias in Detinue erroneously issued 

through her then counsel Jason Michael Breneman, Esquire herein after (“Breneman”), 

on or about February 4, 2020, the legality of the procedure followed by Breneman is the 

matter of other proceeding before the Court given the Writ of Fi Fe Detinue did not 

follow the judgement. Namely, Zeidan did not file a Warrant in Detinue Pursuant to 

Code of Virginia §§ 16.1-79, 8.01-114, 8.01-121, nor did they file any pleading with the 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 7
Court asserting any ownership interest in Marley, that arose to meet the procedural 

requirements and given notice thereof to Plaintiff that Ziedan was seeking a Warrant for 

possession of Marley. 

7. Upon information and belief Cooper at no time was aware of the pre-liminary 

hearing in HGDC and he further had no knowledge that Zeidan asserted any interest in 

his yearling horse Marley, though he had recently been reminded that Zeidan was seeking 

further payments for a personal loan he had obtained from her in 2014. 

8. Upon information and belief Zeidan did not file or cause to be filed a report of 

satisfaction as to the HGDC Judgment for Case No. GVGV19004495-00, upon the date 

of the bankruptcy filing notwithstanding the seizure of Marley. Further, public records 

available as of February 14, 2020, obtained by Plaintiff purportedly show no subsequent 

filing of the same, nor evidence of an executed sheriff’s sale. See attached Exhibit 1 and 

Exhibit 2. 

9. Upon information and belief upon the date of the petition, the state court appeal 

deadline had not run, nor had Zeidan or her counsel serve Plaintiff with the applicable 

state law exemptions available to Plaintiff. Thus, significant procedural deficiencies 

existed upon the date of fling and remain uncured as to the redemption requirement 

which Plaintiff is entitled. One of those procedural safeguards provides Plaintiff the 

option of payment in full of the Warrant in Debt. 

10. Upon information and belief Zeidan, being present upon the seizure, categorically 

refused payment in full by Plaintiff, stating “no I don’t want the money any more...I 

want the horse because I know it will hurt you more.” Both Zeidan and her Counsel, who 

was also present, was advised by Plaintiff that he believed the horse was worth at 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 7
minimum $10,000.00 an amount far exceeding the debt and that he was filing a 

bankruptcy case with Chandler Law Firm, which present counsel confirmed to all 

present. 

11. Despite said notice of the value of the property to Creditor and Counsel and 

Plaintiff’s intent to file, Plaintiff was never provided with a notice of auction nor clarify 

what the process was in regard to the return of the animal. 

12. Since the date of the bankruptcy petition numerous demands have been made on 

Zeidan and Breneman, by present counsel, for return of the horse to no avail. Either 

Creditor has refused to return the horse or Breneman has neglected his duties to inform 

his client of prevailing law in this regard, resulting in and necessitating in the proceedings 

herein. 

AVOIDANCE OF PREFERENTIAL TRANSFER PURSUANT TO §547 

13. The execution of the Writ of Fi Fe Detinue constitutes: (a) a transfer of the 

Debtor’s Property; (b) to a creditor of the Debtor; (c) on account of an antecedent debt; 

(d) made while the Debtor was insolvent; (e) within 90 days of the Petition Date that; (f) 

enables the Zeidan to receive more than Creditor would receive if the Writ of Fi Fe 

Detinue had not been executed, and it were to receive payment of such debt only to the 

extent provided under the Bankruptcy Code. 15. 

14. The seizure within 90 days of the Petition Date constitutes a preferential transfer 

of an interest in Plaintiff’s Property that is voidable by the Chapter 13 Trustee as a 

preference under 11 U.S.C. § 547 and recoverable under § 550. 

15. Plaintiff further, avers that the failure to follow the procedural safeguards of 

Virginia law and the corresponding erroneously filed Writ of Fi Fe Detinue, was and is 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 4 of 7
void or voidable as to creating any secured interest in Plaintiff’s horse Marley for the 

purposes of these proceedings and the therefore renders any good-faith argument that 

Creditor perfected any secured interest obtained via the Writ of Fi Fe Detinue speculative 

at best from the onset of Creditors unlawful possession of Marley. 

RECOVERY OF PROPERTY UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 550 

16. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations in the above paragraphs, inclusive, 

as though fully set forth herein. 

17. As alleged above, Plaintiff is entitled to avoid the Pre-Petition Transfers under 11 

U.S.C. §§ 547 and/or 548, respectively. 

18. Defendant is the initial transferee of the Pre-Petition Transfer or the entity for 

whose benefit the Pre-Petition Transfer was made, or an immediate or mediate transferee 

of such initial transferee of the Pre-Petition Transfer, 

19. The Plaintiff is entitled to recover for the estate the proceeds or value of the PrePetition Transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 550. 

20. The Plaintiff is entitled to an order and judgment under 11 U.S.C. § 550 in that 

the proceeds or value of the Pre-Petition Transfer is recovered for the benefit of the 

estate. 

TO PRESERVE PROPERTY OF THE ESTATE PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 551 

21. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the 

above paragraphs, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein. 

22. The Pre-Petition Transfer is property of the estate of the Debtor. 

23. Each of the Pre-Petition Transfers, or the value thereof, should be preserved for 

the benefit of the Debtor’s estate pursuant to § 551 of the Bankruptcy Code. 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 5 of 7
MOTION FOR TURNOVER OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO §§ 541, 542 AND 

1306 

24. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the 

above paragraphs, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein. 

25. Certain of Plaintiff’s exempt property, which is property of the estate as defined 

by 11 U.S.C. § 541, to wit, the yearling horse, Marley in which he has an interest, was 

taken by the Defendant. The Defendant has refused to return the horse upon receipt of 

the notice of bankruptcy filing as required by 11 U.S.C. § 542. 

26. Plaintiff’s counsel has sent Defendant’s counsel, Breneman, written notice of the 

filing via email and first-class mail and has called and left messages regarding the filing 

and requested that Defendant return the vehicle to the Plaintiff. 

27. The Trustee has not acted to recover this exempt property of the Plaintiff’s. 

28. Under 11 U.S.C. § 1306, the Plaintiff is entitled to possession of all property of the 

estate. 

29. The Defendant is listed as a general unsecured creditor in the Plaintiff’s Schedule 

F of his bankruptcy petition. 

30. Nonetheless, defendant has refused to turn over the property as required by 11 

U.S.C. § 542. 

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, acting pursuant to the concurrent powers of the 

Chapter 13 Trustee, prays for judgment for Plaintiff and against the Defendant costs of 

suit incurred herein, including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees; Determining that the 

Pre-Petition Transfer is avoidable as a preferential transfer under Section 547 of the 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 6 of 7
Bankruptcy Code, or alternatively, that the Pre-Petition Transfer is avoidable under 

Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code, and that Plaintiff is entitled to recover the PrePetition Transfer under Section 550 of the Bankruptcy Code; Preserving the Pre-Petition 

Transfer for the benefit of the estate; that the Court Order the Defendant forthwith to turn 

over the Debtor’s horse to the Debtor; find that the Defendant is in contempt of Court for 

violating 11 U.S.C. §§ 362 and 542; pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 105(a) and 362(h) 

damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and punitive damages for this complaint and 

Order such other and further relief as may be just and proper. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 Frederick Dewon Cooper 

 

 

 By Counsel 

 /s/ Kimberly A. Chandler 

 Kimberly A. Chandler, VSB# 47897 

Chandler Law Firm 

P.O. Box 17586 

Richmond, VA 23226 

Phone (804) 353-1971 

Fax (480) 393-5764 

Counsel for Frederick Dewon Cooper 

Case 20-03017-KRH Doc 1 Filed 02/18/20 Entered 02/18/20 18:06:59 Desc Main

Document Page 7 of 7