Frank J. Kokoszka is once again speaking at The NABT Annual Conference!

 

ZOOM INFORMATION FOR 341 MEETINGS OF CREDITORS WITH TRUSTEE FRANK J. KOKOSZKA

Meeting ID 682 668 2897

Passcode 9254024265 

Phone 1-872-201-1823

If you are a creditor, please e-mail Trustee Kokoszka, at least one full day prior to the scheduled meeting of creditors to notify the Trustee that you wish to appear at a meeting. 

Next Meetings of Creditors Dates for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

 Next Meeting of Creditors:

September 12, 2022

Continued Date:

October 17, 2022 at 10:30 am

Next Meetings of Creditors Dates for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

Next Meeting of Creditors:

June 13, 2022

Continued Date:

June 27, 2022 

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TRUSTEE FRANK J. KOKOSZKA ZOOM MEETING OF CREDITORS

 

CONTAINS INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR UPCOMING 341 MEETING TO BE CONDUCTED BY ZOOM

 You will receive a email with a Zoom invitation containing the Zoom link approximately 5 days prior to your scheduled meeting of creditors. Counsel is responsible for providing the Zoom link to your client.

 The Zoom invitation will provide information about how to access the meeting using one of two options: link or call-in number and access code. You can familiarize yourself with Zoom at: www.zoom.us. Unless your device uses the IOS operating system (IPhone, IPad or Apple computer) you do not need to download the Zoom app. If you are using an IOS operating system you can download the Zoom mobile app from the App Store for free. A free account is available on Zoom.

 IF YOU ARE AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING A DEBTOR:

At least 7 days prior to your meeting date, I must receive a completed Zoom Registration Form either via the Document Delivery Portal or via email to trustee@k-jlaw.com .  Please include the Debtor’s name and the date of the meeting in the e-mail’s subject line. A copy of the Zoom Registration Form can be found at the Bankruptcy Court’s Website. Only if the Debtor is appearing by phone rather than video and the attorney has not been able to verify the debtor’s identification, a Verification of Identification and Social Security Number Form (“Verification Form”), which is found at the bottom of the Zoom Registration Form, must be provided to me at least 3 days prior to the meeting, along with copies of their ID and social security card.

 I prefer to receive a copy of the Debtor’s ID and Social Security Number Verification prior to the meeting from all Debtors. However, please advise your clients to have both a picture ID and verification of Social Security Number available with them at the meeting of creditors.

 INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL ATTORNEYS, CREDITORS AND DEBTORS:

 1. When you “arrive” for your meeting you will be placed in the virtual Waiting Room.

2. When signing into Zoom for the Meeting, it is very important that all parties (counsel and debtors), use their full name and/or the case number & Debtor’s name for identification so I can invite you to the meeting from the virtual Waiting Room when your case is called. If the Debtor is appearing by phone only, make sure I have their phone number so that I can identify them in the waiting room. If I cannot identity who is in the waiting room, this leads to delays and I will place you at the end of the days’ call.

3.  Debtors and Counsel must be ready to have the meeting held as soon as you are placed in the meeting room.

3. All Debtors are still required to provide 60 days of pay advises and tax returns to me 3 days prior to the meeting. If I do not receive pay advices, tax returns or a zoom registration at least 3 days prior to the meeting date, the meeting will be continued.

4. Debtors and counsel are to be at a set location, and not in transit (this includes walking down the hallway for several minutes while I and everyone else on the call have to wait), so that full attention can be given to the questions being asked and background noise can be controlled better.

5. Only debtors and their counsel and creditors or interested parties will be allowed on the connection, i.e., no “moral support” or supplementary answers to be provided by friends or family.

6. As always, Debtors will be asked if they received and have read a copy of the Bankruptcy Information Sheet from the Office of the US Trustee. Counsel, please make sure that you have provided a copy of the Bankruptcy Information Sheet to your clients and that you have reviewed it with them.

7. During the meetings, Debtors must be prepared to identify their signatures on the: a) Petition, b) Schedules; and, c) Statement of Financial Affairs. Attorneys should make sure that their clients are prepared to do so. All Debtors must have the following documents in front of them during the meeting: a) Signature page from the Voluntary Petition; b) Declaration of Schedules; and, c) Signature Page of the Statement of Financial Affairs (including any amendments).

TAX RETURNS AND PAY ADVICES

Meetings will not be held if I do not receive via Document Delivery (preferred method) or email (do not mail tax returns or pay advices) each Debtor’s most recently filed tax returns and pay advices at least 48 hours ago. If you send the 341 documents by e-mail to trustee@k-jlaw.com, include both the debtor’s name and meeting date in the subject line. If the Debtor does not have recent tax returns or pay advices because of unemployment/lack of sufficient income, please notify me of this prior to the meeting date and/or provide an affidavit.

Translation Services-Please notify me prior to the meeting date if the Debtor will be requiring a translator.

In general, please refer to the Instructions regarding Zoom Meeting of Creditors.

Address any questions (including a request for a continued date) via email to trustee@k-jlaw.com.

Thank you,

Meeting of Creditors Scheduled for 8/17/2020

 

Next Meeting of Creditors for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

Next Meeting of Creditors Date:

February 24, 2020

Continued Meeting of Creditors Date:

March 23, 2020

Next Meeting of Creditors for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

Upcoming Meeting Date:

October 28, 2019

Continued Meeting Date:

November 25, 2019 at 10:30 am

Next Meeting of Creditors Date for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

Next Meeting Date:

Monday, September 23, 2019

Continued Date:

Monday, October 28, 2019 at 10:30 am 

Next Meeting of Creditors Date for Trustee Frank J. Kokoszka

Next Meeting Date:

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

Continued Date:

Monday, June 24, 2019 at 10:30 am

Upcoming Trustee Sale of Assets

https://heathindustrial.com/event-pro/lingraph-packaging-services-company/

Frank J. Kokoszka to Speak at DuPage County Bar Association Bankruptcy Law MCLE Meeting

DuPage Bar Association Meeting Notice

Speaker: Frank J. Kokoszka - Kokoszka & Janczur, P.C. - Chapter 7 Trustee

Topic: Not Your Everyday, Usual Assets and Objections to Exemptions

A discussion on some recents developments in bankruptcy cases, particularly those in DuPage
County with potential assets of the estate. These "unusual" assets raise issues in cases including: the
reopening of a closed bankruptcy case; what constitutes property of the bankruptcy estate; and, what,
if any exemptions apply to such assets.

Time: 11:45am to 1:00 pm

Location: DuPage Bar Center - Lower Level

Credits: 1 Credit MCLE

For more information, please access the link

2019 Super Lawyer

Frank J. Kokoszka has once again been included among Illinois Super Lawyers in the category of Bankruptcy: Business

https://digital.superlawyers.com/superlawyers/ilslrs19/MobilePagedReplica.action?fbclid=IwAR2Rx7nKQ8ROu47jqb4pvw7DtTFt0e0QUVS1Dp241p_I7cCJFgLdrrM-TSE&pm=2&folio=24#pg24

Upcoming Trustee Sale of Assets

http://heathindustrial.com/event-pro/lingraph-packaging-services-company/

Lingraph Packaging Services Company

Our Address:

Kokoszka & Janczur, P.C.
19 South LaSalle Street
Suite 1201
Chicago, Illinois 60603-1419
312-443-9600 (phone)
312-443-5704 (fax)
312-254-3156 (efax)

UPCOMING TRUSTEE SALE OF ASSETS- P.J. Nagic, Inc.

AMERICAN AUCTION ASSOCIATES- P.J. NAGIC, INC.

Subject to Order of the Bankruptcy Court, Frank J. Kokoszka, as chapter 7 trustee of the Estate of P.J. Nagic, Inc., will sell the assets of P.J. Nagic, Inc.
The Trustee has retained American Auction Associates to conduct the auction/sale of assets.
The above link will provide further information and details about the upcoming auction.

NEW ADDRESS- STARTING MARCH 24, 2017

Please note that as of March 24, 2017, our Chicago address will be as follows:

Kokoszka & Janczur, P.C.

19 South LaSalle Street

Suite 1201

Chicago, Illinois 60603-1419

312-443-9600 (main phone)

312-443-5704 (fax)

Kokoszka & Janczur, P.C. Facebook Page

Please visit our Facebook Page for frequent updates:

Kokoszka & Janczur, P.C.

NLRB Decision On Northwestern Football

  NLRB Northwestern decision

THE UNEXPECTED TWISTS AND TURNS OF LITIGATION

            Several years ago, a client contacted us because it suspected that it had been scammed by an individual it had trusted. After briefly investigating, we learned that the client’s suspicion was correct. The individual (who we’ll call John Smith) had collected well over $100,000 on debts owed to our client, a construction subcontractor, for extensive goods and services our client provided. For over two years, Smith, through his company (which we’ll call ABC Corp.), billed our client and accepted its payments for services purportedly performed in attempting collection of the debts on behalf of our client. He also repeatedly reassured our client that he was acting in its interests and on its behalf, and would notify it as soon as collection was made. Despite collecting approximately $130,000, Smith never notified our client and, when the client got word that Smith had collected some of the money and confronted Smith, he affirmatively denied any such recovery.

            Obviously our client had been defrauded, and we had to take action against Smith to protect our client’s rights. The only hitch was that both Smith and ABC Corp. filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In fact, Smith’s petition was filed just four days after he obtained the vast majority of the $130,000, through another corporation he owned.

            It is well known that some debts are non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. Debts resulting from fraud are one example. So we knew we had a basis to file an “adversary proceeding” against Smith in the bankruptcy court, objecting to the discharge of the debt he owed our client as a result of his fraud. After looking at his bankruptcy schedules and statement of financial affairs, however, we realized that there were glaring omissions and misstatements that gave rise to an objection to Smith’s discharge entirely. So we filed a complaint against Smith, objecting both to the discharge of the specific debt owed to our client as well as to his discharge generally.

            At first, Smith failed to answer or otherwise respond to our complaint, and also failed to appear at the first scheduled hearing in the case. Only after we filed a motion for entry of default, did Smith appear. His attorney (different from the one who represented him when he filed the bankruptcy petition itself) asked the court for additional time to answer or otherwise plead, and the court granted it. A baseless motion to dismiss was filed, and after it was fully briefed, the court denied it. When Smith finally answered the complaint, he included some nonsensical affirmative defenses, requiring us to file a motion to strike such defenses. After that motion was fully briefed, the court granted it and struck the affirmative defenses, and so we were finally ready to move past the pleading stage almost a year after our complaint was filed. Unfortunately, our difficulties in dealing with Smith had just begun.

            Pursuant to court protocol, we had to exchange mandatory disclosures with Smith. We made our own disclosures to Smith, but he failed to reciprocate. Smith’s attorney contacted us to explain that he was having difficulty working with Smith, and shortly thereafter he withdrew as Smith’s counsel. Smith continued to ignore his mandatory disclosure obligation, just as he ignored our discovery requests. This went on for several months, despite our efforts to communicate with Smith and obtain his compliance. This necessitated motion practice, including a motion for default judgment. Again, only after forcing wasteful motion practice upon us and involving the court, and only after the court ordered him to comply, did Smith respond to our discovery requests and sit for his deposition. Even then, his responses were grossly inadequate and his deposition testimony was combative and, as would later be proved, dishonest.

            Smith then prevailed upon the court to appoint him pro bono counsel. Several excellent attorneys from a large firm filed their appearances on his behalf, and extensive discovery ensued. Smith, while living in a large home and driving luxury cars, now had lawyers devoting countless hours to his case free of charge, leaving no stone unturned.

            We made several efforts to settle on very reasonable terms, but Smith was determined to fight us to the end. After a trial, three years after the complaint was filed, Smith’s mendacious and pugnacious testimony, as well as the mountain of evidence against him, resulted in a judgment in our favor, denying Smith’s discharge. However, because it was unnecessary to the determination that Smith’s discharge must be denied, the court abstained from ruling on the claims for the debt that Smith owed to our client. Consequently, we had to initiate a new lawsuit, this time in state court.

            Smith was wily, and we knew that the sheriff would not have much luck serving him with summons. But with a little planning and coordination, we were able to serve Smith using a special process server. We were then well on our way to obtaining a money judgment against Smith and justice for our client. . . . Two days later, Smith died.

            Unsure of what assets might turn up for either the bankruptcy estate (whose administration is still ongoing) or the probate estate that was opened shortly after Smith’s death, we decided to continue the litigation, substituting the personal representative of the probate estate as the party defendant. Apparently the personal representative was uninterested in defending, and we obtained a default judgment, which included punitive damages.

            The above saga illustrates that you can never be sure what to expect in litigation, and what seems like a straightforward case can sometimes morph into an intense battle of wills, full of twists and turns.