UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Ft Lauderdale Division

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

In re:

KISMA WILLIAMS REEFE Case No. 21-13961-PDR

Chapter 7

Debtor

_____________________________/

NATIONWIDE JUDGMENT RECOVERY, INC. 

Plaintiff, 

KISMA WILLIAMS REEFE Adv Pro. No. 21-01246-PDR-A

Defendant. 

_______________________________________/

REPLY TO

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

COMPLAINT TO DETERMINE DISCHARGEABILITY OF DEBT

Kisma Vonetta Reefe, Debtor/Defendant, replies to the Plaintiff’s Response to

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint to Determine Dischargeability of Debt [ECF

15], and says:

1. This very Plaintiff has failed to bring to this Court’s attention a proceeding in

another District in which its theory of this case was summarily shot down. 

Attached hereto is the order denying this Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. 

The reasoning of the Court for the Eastern District of Michigan is adopted by Ms.

Reef.

2. Plaintiff apparently believes that if it calls a cat a dog enough times, this Court

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 1 of 13
will start call a feline a canine. To call the judgment held by Plaintiff against

Kisma Vonetta Reefe one based in her fraud, or her violation of securities laws is

to call a cat a dog. The only dog here, is the Plaintiff’s theory, unsupported by a

single citation of authority, or, more importantly, a citation to any portion of the

Complaint which includes allegations fit to survive a motion to dismiss.

3. When finally addressing the “merits”, following 3 pages of “boilerplate”, Plaintiff

asserts “Nationwide has satisfied the special pleading requirements of

Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b), made applicable in adversary proceedings by Fed.R.Bankr.P.

7009, which states that “[i]n all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances

constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity.” Yet, Plaintiff

cannot point to a single allegation in the Complaint which details any fraudulent

conduct of Kisma Vonetta Reefe.

4. After generically referring to the sufficiency of the Complaint in pleading fraud,

Plaintiff immediately turns to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19) without tying in any of the

allegations in the Complaint to any violation of securities laws by Kisma Vonetta

Reefe, or any common law fraud perpetrated by Kisma Vonetta Reefe.

5. A word search of the 47 pages of the Complaint and attachments does not locate a

single reference to any fraudulent act or securities violations of Kisma Vonetta

Reefe.

2

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 2 of 13
6. Plaintiff includes references to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19)(B) without acknowledging

that one must first come within one of the two sections of 11 U.S.C. §

523(a)(19)(A). There are no facts alleged in the Complaint which can be

interpreted to find that Kisma Vonetta Reefe violated securities laws, or

committed a fraud by being the recipient of net winnings. Without hitting one of

th predicates in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19)(A), one never gets to section (B).

7. Plaintiff asserts, “The Judgment against the Defendant is a debt owed by the

Defendant for violation of securities law and/or common law fraud in connection

with the purchase or sale of any security, and the debt is memorialized in a

judgment, attached to Plaintiff’s Complaint as Exhibit A.” Exhibit A to the

Complaint does not contain the word “fraud”. In fact, Exhibit A says nothing

which Plaintiff asserts.

8. Among the many irrelevant cases cited by Plaintiff, is In re Chan, 355 B.R. 494

(Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2006), case in which the court denied a motion for relief from

stay by an unsecured creditor who was pursuing securities fraud litigation against

debtor prior to commencement of debtor's Chapter 7 case. It is so obviously

inapposite to the case at bar, and the selected quote therefrom is so disingenuously

taken out of context that one has to wonder if this reply complies with the

requirements of B.R. 9011.

3

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 3 of 13
9. The next irrelevant case, disingenuously inserted into Plaintiff’s reply, is In re

Gilley, No. 12-11443, 2013 WL 4460499, at *1 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. Aug. 19, 2013),

aff'd sub nom. Gilley v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, No. 1:13CV916, 2014 WL

11497958 (M.D.N.C. June 3, 2014), aff'd sub nom. Gilley v. S.E.C., 590 F. App'x

227 (4th Cir. 2015), in which the SEC obtained a final judgment in which the

Debtor therein admitted, by default, to having committed securities fraud and

violations of other federal securities laws, including: unlawful sale of unregistered

securities; acting as a broker-dealer without the required license; and failure to

disclose material information to investors. How Mr. Gilley’s offenses relate to

this proceeding, in which Kisma Vonetta Reefe simply received more money than

she invested escapes this attorney.

10. What is “‘ the true nature of the debt’” for which Plaintiff trots out Brown v.

Felsen, 442 U.S. 127, 138 (1979)? Nowhere in the Complaint, does the Plaintiff

reveal any “true nature of the debt” other than Kisma Vonetta Reefe having

received more money than she invested.

11. What are the “‘economic realities underlying [the] transaction...’” which the

Plaintiff urges the Court to examine through the lens of Bell v. Disner, 2014 WL

6978690 at *2 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 9, 2014). The economic reality is that Kisma

Vonetta Reefe invested in a Ponzi scheme and came out ahead. She did not

4

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 4 of 13
violate any securities laws, she did not commit a common-law fraud.

12. Archer v. Warner, 538 U.S. 314, 123 S. Ct. 1462, 155 L. Ed. 2d 454 (2003)

involved a fraudulent debt and a subsequent settlement agreement, but the original

debt was due entirely to the fraudulent conduct of that Debtor. Kisma Vonetta

Reefe’s debt to the Plaintiff is not rooted in any fraudulent conduct of hers.

13. What is “the history of the debt’s origin” to be examined through the teachings of

In re Schwartz, No. 07-30508, 2007 WL 3051865, at *1 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Oct. 17,

2007)? Mr. Schwartz settled a lawsuit alleging breach of fiduciary duty, common

law fraud, fraud in real estate transaction, violation of the Texas Securities Act,

and breach of contract. Kisma Vonetta Reefe invested money and received back

more than she put in. Nothing sinister, no fraud on her part, no violation of

securities laws on her part.

14. The procedural posture of Bell v. Disner, No. 3:14CV91, 2014 WL 6978690, at *1

(W.D.N.C. Dec. 9, 2014) was the consideration, and denial, of a motion to dismiss,

wherein the receiver actually made sufficient allegations in that complaint, unlike

the case at bar wherein the Plaintiff seeks to tag the innocent with the sins of the

crooks.

15. It is not Ms. Reefe who fails to consider precedent of the Eleventh Circuit in In re

Lunsford, 848 F.3d 963, 968 (11th Cir. 2017). No, it is, once again, the Plaintiff

5

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 5 of 13
selectively taking quotations out of context. The Circuit agreed with Ms. Reefe

wherein it was stated, “For a debt to be excepted from discharge, it must be “for” a

violation of securities laws, § 523(a)(19)(A), but it must also “result[ ] ... from” a

court order or “any settlement agreement entered into by the debtor,” § 523

(a)(19)(B)(i)–(ii) (emphasis added).” Plaintiff’s judgment against Ms. Reefe is not

“for” a violation of securities laws.

16. Plaintiff then doubles-down on the misinterpretation of Husky.

17. By failing to deny it, the Plaintiff admits that its Complaint is a classic “shotgun

pleading”, which should be dismissed by the Court under binding precedent. 

Clifford v. Federman, 855 Fed.Appx. 525, 5281

 (11th Cir 2021), Vibe Micro, Inc.

v. Shabanets, 878 F.3d 1291, 1295 (11th Cir. 2018). Count 2 incorporates by

reference the entirety of the preceding 32 paragraphs.

1

 See Fed. Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 generally governing citation of

judicial decisions issued on or after Jan. 1, 2007. See also U.S. Ct. of App. 11th

Cir. Rule 36-2.

6

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 6 of 13
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served via

notice of electronic filing on October 27, 2021, to all parties receiving electronic notice

including: Martin L Sandler, Esq on behalf of Plaintiff Nationwide Judgment Recovery,

Inc., martin@sandler-sandler.com.

Respectfully submitted,

FLORIDA BANKRUPTCY GROUP, LLC.

4121 N 31st Avenue

Hollywood, Fl 33021-2011

954-893-7670/954-252-2540 Fax

By: s/ Kevin C Gleason 

Bankruptcylawyer@aol.com

Fla Bar No. 369500

7

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 7 of 13
	
	
 		  !"#"$ 	%	& '()* +) , -./0'1-.23 	4-& 
56)677& 8 	/8 !!*# 	%	& 7/) , 9:;<;9<=<>9?>@?>@<A;<B:C=;<D;EEFGH9D;9< E9?GIHH=?AJI>BH@<DK=<>L=<L@CC;<BG@:D@HM@?NOKNPNQM@<LR 9:;<;9<R@=?;<B '6/8S(2/606+7)'.))'
56)677T1)67.11S U./01)V23)W$&)'X)6YZ'7/)765/(((60)')6 V23)W[Z&/
56)677765/(5S+676.(()7)')6V23)W[$Z'.) '5/)5('62'60)')6()1+&$"&/)')3)')6./ /861)'.)2'/.5/+2'(66'607()1+"&$)$$1 '.)\'/26//)6.\6))/266)')6&)')'06860 5+2'(66)'755\60&)')6\655+/6/ '.)'26//557)'5/\6))0.1)7)'()6&557)' +67/]'6+6)765/+S)'()6&/557)'.)'6)626)/+S)'()6'.) 76//225./755\ ^_`_aabc`dedfghijklmno_pq^jq^rstdnuno_pq^jq^rrrv^rvajwxynrgzc

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 8 of 13
	




		

	
  !"#$ 
!"
#$ ! !"
%	
&'
&#( 
! )*+!
	 	
#$ ! ! ,! ,	-


	
&
.	/&
.."	
 

&

			.	



0'/#1" -	
	-
	
		
..				
	. 23456789:;<=>?@A8 B8:923456789:!"#C(D'1"$1E$$ D
F)*+(!

*.
G	/&
.. HI
*J!-

&
.
&


	.
*	

	.K9889L4M<N9??O9L3<O;<P>QQM7R89: 9L3<O9LA?<"
S	TEEC U*S!"	V

"($V		..
& 
 HI
J!


)W1E	/&
..G+		

 	 *	FX!I
*
	*.
G&
&

.	.
 
.
	*.

	 !	.
.


&/	Y"-
. 	
M7R89:

	"
.


&
.
S	
	&
.


& 
.

	
.	


.	 !	.
.

.H- 	"&
"	.

J		.
.	 !"-
	. S	
	&


 299)W1E	+		 *	FX!!#,


*.
"M7R89:	
	.
M9Z98QA8L 
	

&
-	&
	"	
.

"	
M9Z98QA8L
	
 -
-	.
&	.


&D

*.
-
&
&

L:A8RZ9:99	. .


&
."-
	
.	M7R89:	
	
F

.
	
 

[\]\^^_`]abacdefghijkl\mn[gn[opqakrkl\mn[gn[ooos[os^gtuvk[dw`

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 9 of 13
	














 
 ! ! "!

 ! #!

$



%
&



 





 '



 ! #!
(

)%




*+,- "!


. 
!
/



%

0



1
 



 





 ! 2'!




34"
 #2!5
%




15

%



 



0




16
 

!

1
5

5


7





1
 7

%

%6
 $!
5
5
5



1

7


1 
5
. 
!
%
&5
5

5




% 0

&






/7
6 

!
%





%
6
 


!
%





/

%
5

5 7%5


5


%
7%5


7%5 %
5
5


7%
1
%
 8



 ! ! "!
(

)%



- !

%5
77%5
/
5


4
5
15
 




5

4


%. "!
75

7
5


5
 


7

9




9


 

6 #

"
7

/7

5










1 

:;<;==>?<@A@



BCD
EF



GHIJK
;LM:FM:N



OP@JQJK
;LM:FM:N
NNR:NR=F



STUJ
E
CV
?

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 10 of 13
	

					

	
		
		
 
		 !
!		
	"#$
	 "			
		 		#"%



 			

	&		 	

'()*(+**,'*			'()*(+**,'*"-.+'/(0123 40(5*''6*57'38*02'39--:;+0*-.+'/(01<=<>"??@A?B	"C@" C"D	
	
	

			 		
	

			"8**87*0)E+ 238F:;+0*87*0)E+?<>"CCCA@B	"CGHI,E7()EJ*KLM(/8*539*N3 0*,3OE.P7M23QR,5(N?>"@@=A@@CB	"CGS0*+23857.7(,T;+0* 857.7(,TBU"<AC<V"U"<AC@CWX?YA@Z[	"$"\" DD"<C" "U	]$$!	B		]$B	V!!
	 $^B		
" ">		
	
	
!	 B	!		[87*0)E+QR,5(N857.7(,T
 "%B	!"%B	!	

	 	87*0)E+QR,5(N857.7(,T"%B	!	
	

 		
			
 ^!	
		
 	
		"#_*)`*0M23a6b6S+R2*0'E,:E018*02'39;+53;+0*_*)`*0M =>"@@<?B	"<" =

cdedffgheijiklmnopqrstduvcovcwxyiszstduvcovcwww{cw{fo|}~sflh

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 11 of 13
	

	


		

	


		
 

	
	

	


		


	 
 
!

 "#
	$	%	
&
		'()*+*,+	


	

	 

	
$	


		!


	

	&


!	!

-!
	.		'()*+*,+
!
/	
 (.	
	
			
0!
	
/	
!
/

 '()*+*)+*1+2
	3/

	
$	&	
&	
/ 




	
	


&	2
	3	
$	%&&456 789:*;9:+(<=>?)@AABA)*> CD
)A=+
!	


 		&!2
	3
E
&!			


	
		
2F		 G
H	&	
	
	!%32F
	!	
	%3 IJ8	A*E	!KLMN;OPQRQ5O8S;5878TOU(=@VW(<<W$	(@(@< *)A<++<	

	


		

	
		
		 

	
	
		&	
!	
	
		
			

	 
		


		


	 

! 

 =X	


	

	

	
$	


		!


	
 
	&


!	!-!
	!	

	/

2
	3 
'()*+*)+*1+W
!





	
YJZO
		
	 [
	
YJZO
	
		

E	
!	
	 (

\]^]__`a^bcbdefghijklm]no\ho\pqrblslm]no\ho\pppt\pt_huvwlxeya

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 12 of 13
			
	

	
  !"#!#"$"%&'()	

	
 *!+#! !"#!#"
,

	 ,'-'.'(((/..	
 

01234563047849:4;<=><?<@

A

BCDCEEFGDHIHJKLMNOPQRSCTUBNUBVWXHRYRSCTUBNUBVVVZBVZEN[\]RGK^G

Case 21-01246-PDR Doc 16 Filed 10/27/21 Page 13 of 13