Each client is unique in relation to the client’s issues and goals.
In addition, rarely if ever can a particular legal result be assured. As such, the pursued and achieved results will frequently vary by client; but there are often common goals for similarly situated clients, which often lead to common if not identical outcomes. In sum, while all client results will, of course, vary depending on the circumstances, the firm will always strive to achieve the best possible outcomes for each client as Kevin and the firm have always done.
Orderly wind down their operations in exercise of their principals’ fiduciary duties because of, for example, financial distress or pending litigation. In re Balusa, Inc., In re Bomber Industries, Inc., In re Colorado Pie, LLC, In re Netstructures, Inc., In re St. Anselm Exploration Company, and In re Ultra Energy Solutions, Inc. are some instances where the firm has represented companies undertake an organized liquidation pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code.
Confirmation of plans of reorganization or liquidation. Kevin has been counsel to Littleton Day Surgery Center, LLC, Supra Telecommunication and Information Systems, Inc., and VESCO Consulting Services, LLC in their Chapter 11 reorganization cases, helping them confirm plans and exit bankruptcy with healthy balance sheets and resolve other pre-bankruptcy problems.
For example landlords, insurance companies, ex-spouses, trade vendors, judgment holders, or lienholders, share the common goals of protecting their interests and maximizing their returns. Beyond that, because creditors are unique in what they are owed, the specific circumstances giving rise to the debt, the debtor’s operations and finances as well as other bankruptcy-related events, and the creditors’ own circumstances and goals, representation necessarily entails very specific analyses, plans, and implementation. Some creditors want relief from stay to pursue their rights out of bankruptcy, like what happened in In re Abeinsa Teyma General Partnership (Chapter 11), In re High Plains Computing, Inc. (Chapter 11), and In re Hruby (Chapter 7). Many like RBS Asset Finance, Inc., a secured creditor in In re Brundage-Bone Concrete Pumping, Inc. and In re JLS Concrete Pumping, Inc., participate in the Chapter 11 case to maximize their recovery. Some like the landlords in In re Al Silwady, Inc., In re Charming Charlie Holdings, Inc., In re Sports Authority Holdings, Inc., In re the Gymboree Corporation, In re Telescope Management Group, LLC, and In re Way to Grow, Inc., while also seeking to maximize their recovery, set about to protect and enforce the terms of their non-residential real property leases. Still others like Marrick Medical Finance, LLC assert their rights by, among other things, prevailing on objecting to the discharge the debtor’s debtor to them as what happened in In re Chernushin, the Chapter 7 individual debtor case of a disbarred attorney.
For instance, in Simplicity Ground Services, LLC v. Tsouris, Kevin obtained a state court judgment for treble damages, fees, and costs against an employee who stole from his employer. And in Pauli v. Schneider, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado ruled in Kevin’s client’s favor, an individual debtor, following a dischargeability trial. The published decision is here.
The firm works hard to achieve as, if successful, it saves time, money, and mitigates risk, among other benefits. Often this happens in the context of pending bankruptcy cases like in In re Metaphysical Research Society, Inc. where a consensual resolution led to the debtor client voluntarily agreeing to dismiss its bankruptcy case. Or it can happen through litigation such as in Green v. Lifevest Publishing, Inc. where litigation commenced by Kevin’s client led to a settlement and ultimate dismissal of the case. Though not always matters of public record, the firm has also capably helped numerous people and businesses work-out or otherwise resolve, often through settlement, adverse situations like those arising from broken business relationships, debtor-creditor issues, and familial disputes.
Kevin has successfully represented receivers like Eric Grothe and Plan Administrators as in In re Big Sandy Holding Co.
Further, Kevin has represented various other constituents as an attorney.