How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask socrateaser Your Own Question
socrateaser, Attorney
Category: Bankruptcy Law
Satisfied Customers: 39144
Experience:  Attorney and Real Estate Broker -- Retired (mostly)
Type Your Bankruptcy Law Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

About five years ago my billing firm embezzled a very large

Resolved Question:

About five years ago my billing firm embezzled a very large amount from me and several others. She was prosecuted for medicare and tax matters, pled guilty, and is presently in jail for a year. During the course of the investigation she shredded documents and did not turn over petitioned records. She has protected assets including a home and cars bought with stolen funds. I have only recently obtained records form the DOJ. Would there be any advantage to re-opening the (fraudulent) bankruptcy vs. a civil suit?
Submitted: 8 years ago.
Category: Bankruptcy Law
Expert:  socrateaser replied 8 years ago.

I assume that you were listed as a creditor on the original bankruptcy. If so, then in order to reopen the bankruptcy and file an adversary complaint, you would need evidence that could not have been known by use of the tools of discovery at the time that the original discharge order was entered.


This means that even if you did not have the evidence in your possession, if you could have subpoenaed it from the DOJ at the time of the bankruptcy, and you failed to do so, then the court is likely to deny your complaint as res judicata (already decided).


If the evidence was unavailable by any means due to the debtor's willful concealment, and only now has become available, then that would give you grounds to pursue the debtor.


Hope this helps.


Terms and Conditions: By your continuing in this conversation with me, or by your clicking “Accept”, you are expressly agreeing to all of the following: (1) our communication is for entertainment purposes only; (2) you are not consulting me in my professional capacity as an attorney; (3) you do not seek to establish an attorney-client relationship with me, nor do I with you; (4) you will not rely on anything I say and you will obtain appropriate legal counsel via a traditional/office consultation with an attorney licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where your legal issue arises (and you may not use our communication to avoid taxpayer penalties imposed by the U.S. Dept. of Treasury); (5) by communicating with me in this public forum you are irrevocably waiving any right to privacy, confidentiality and attorney-client privilege concerning the matters discussed. You further separately declare that any payment made by you is not consideration for this contract, nor offered for any services rendered by me on your behalf, but rather is made in genuine admiration and respect for my desire to help others. If you do not agree with these terms and conditions, then you must advise me immediately.



Customer: replied 8 years ago.
I am reasonably certain that the DOJ became involved after the bankruptcy began, but before the discharge. During this time I was prohibited from further pursuit of information by the bankruptcy court. There were also Hippa considerations. The DOJ was only able to return the records that I sent to them - not the entire investigative effort (including bank deposits.) So this means I probably cannot re=open at this time? My estimated loss is roughly $300-400,000.
Expert:  socrateaser replied 8 years ago.

If by "prohibited from further pursuit of informatin by the bankruptcy court," you mean that the automatic stay prevented you from further collection efforts, then that won't help your cause, because had you filed an adversary complaint fto have the debtor's debt to you declared fraudulent, at the time, you would have been able to force discovery by subpoena of whatever information you needed to make your case.


If you mean that the court made specific orders preventing you from pursuing the debtor because it would undermine the government investigation, then that would give you grounds to reopen the case.


Considering the amount at stake, you don't have a heck of a lot to lose either way, by moving to reopen -- I just don't think you'll be able to win your motion unless your facts are as I've described.


But, you can certainly run it by a local bankruptcy lawyer and see if there's something I've missed in the analysis.


For a referral, see: and

socrateaser and other Bankruptcy Law Specialists are ready to help you