Part I of this series presented the case of Dam and Trinh Huynh, a Vietnamese immigrant married couple, both of whom were uneducated, non-English-speaking, and addicted to casino gambling. They had amassed a mountain of credit card debt before seeking relief under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. You were asked your opinion of their case, whether or not the Bankruptcy Court should grant them relief. If you need some help with that exercise, here are the points of law that the court used to make its decision:
"The court shall grant the debtor a discharge unless:
a. The debtor, with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor or [trustee], has transferred...property...within one year before the date of the filing of the petition;
b. The debtor has concealed, destroyed, mutilated, falsified, or failed to keep or preserve records...from which the debtor's financial condition...might be ascertained, unless such act or failure was justified under all of the circumstances of the case;
c. The debtor knowingly and fraudulently...made a false oath or account...or withheld records from [the trustee];
d. The debtor has failed to explain satisfactorily...any loss...or deficiency of assets to meet debtor's liabilities."
It looks bleak, doesn't it? Dam and Trinh transferred property well within one year of filing for Chapter 7 relief. They destroyed all the records from which their financial condition might be reconstructed. They failed initially to disclose the totality of their financial condition to the trustee, necessitating an amended petition, and they could not explain where their money went, except for their uncorroborated testimony that they had lost it due to addictive gambling. Is there a ray of hope for this couple in Bankruptcy Court?
Please read Part III to learn the outcome of the Huynh's bankruptcy trial. The result may surprise you.
