Federal Court Removal Timeline

Summary

The 30-day period to remove a case to federal court starts when the defendant receives the initial pleading. Complete diversity and an amount in controversy over $75,000 are required for federal jurisdiction. If either defendant shares a state with the plaintiff, diversity is not met. To remove, file a Notice of Removal in federal court, attach state court documents, notify all parties, and file a copy with the state court. In federal court, file an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis for fee waivers. The decision to remove is up to the defendant, and Massachusetts courts can hear cases with full diversity.

Full Conversation

January 11th *

Thanks for the information. Since you received the initial pleading on January *, *, the *-day period to file for removal to federal court would end on February *, *. It's advisable to seek removal before this deadline.
Do you have any further questions related to this process?

the plantiff * fountian street with a principle place of business in rhode island commenced a civil action against defendanst Karen merritt and James cronan * Oak street norton MA . so theres complete diversity between the parties and as pled the matter in contravery exceeds the sum of $*,* additionally there are federal questions. do I meet the reguirements to remove the case/

To remove a case to federal court, you generally need to meet the following requirements:
- Complete diversity of citizenship (which you have between Rhode Island and Massachusetts).
- The amount in controversy exceeds $*,* (which it does).
- Presence of federal questions.
Based on your information, you meet these requirements. Ensure you file the removal notice by February *, *.
Do you need any specific forms or further details on the removal process?

supposed either me or james lived in Rhode island would that affect the diversity requirement here?

Yes, if either you or James lived in Rhode Island, it would affect the diversity requirement. For diversity jurisdiction, all plaintiffs must be from different states than all defendants. If any defendant shares the same state as a plaintiff, the complete diversity requirement is not met.
Do you have any other questions about the removal process or requirements?

what are the proceduralrequirements that i must do to remove the case/

To remove a case to federal court, you must follow these procedural steps:
- File a Notice of Removal in the federal court within 30 days of receiving the initial pleading or summons.
- Attach all relevant documents from the state court case.
- Provide written notice to all adverse parties.
- File a copy of the Notice of Removal with the state court.
Do you need any specific forms or details on how to file these documents?

Can I file an affidavit of indigency to seek my cost being waived?

Yes, you can file an Affidavit of Indigency in Massachusetts to seek waiver of court fees.
- The form is available on the Massachusetts court websites.
- You must provide detailed financial information.
- The court will review your request and decide if you qualify for a fee waiver.
Do you need help finding the form or any other assistance with this process?

I already qualify in Massachusetts but now I will be filing in a federal court seeking to waive the court fess isnt this a different procedure?

Yes, the procedure for waiving court fees in federal court is different from Massachusetts state court. In federal court, you need to file an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.
- The form can be found on the federal court's website.
- You must provide detailed financial information.
- The federal court will review your application and decide if you qualify for the fee waiver.
Do you need assistance finding the form or any other details about this process?

when i ssek to move the case all parties remail as defendant and plaintiff. right?

Yes, when you seek to remove the case to federal court, all parties remain as defendants and plaintiffs. The roles of the parties do not change; only the forum where the case is being heard changes.
Do you need help with any specific documents for the removal process?

the two defendants in this case - one is indigent anf the other is not. How will the court acess fees or does the fee that was given to the state court by the plaintiff get moved to the federal court ?

In federal court, each defendant must file their own Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis if they seek a fee waiver. The court will assess fees based on individual financial situations. The fee paid to the state court does not automatically transfer to the federal court.
Do you need any assistance with the In Forma Pauperis application process?

if i file a motion into the court stating that the defendent no longer lives at the previosu none address of Rhodeisland and therfore contests the complaint. could I do that rather than file to remove the case?

You can file a motion in court stating the defendant's change of address, but this will not impact the removal process. To remove the case to federal court, you must follow the removal procedure.
Do you need help with the specific steps involved in filing the Notice of Removal?

To clarify. can Massachusetss hear a case that has full doversity?

Yes, Massachusetts courts can hear cases that have full diversity. However, if you meet the requirements for federal jurisdiction (complete diversity and an amount in controversy over $*,*), you also have the option to remove the case to federal court.
Do you need further details on the removal process or any specific forms?

so that is up to the defendant?

Yes, the decision to remove a case to federal court is typically up to the defendant. If the defendant believes that the case meets the federal jurisdiction requirements, they can choose to file for removal.
Do you need help with any specific forms or further details on the removal process?

question. in * James cronan and karen Merritt was issued a default judgement from the a bankruptcy court R.I. based on fraud . Recently that default judment was purchaes from * fountain st assignee Mr. Tiernan to off set damages in a lawsuit that I karen have against him for illegal forclsoure , usury violations breach of contract and 93A. Because he purchased the $*,* judgment for $*,* he is now suing me in superior court (which I want to move the

To address your situation, you may be able to argue that the purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith, especially if it was based on fraudulent conveyance. You might want to challenge the default judgment within the reopened Chapter * bankruptcy case. Consulting with a bankruptcy attorney can provide you with specific guidance on how to proceed with this argument.
Do you need details on how to file a motion to challenge the judgment in the bankruptcy court?

case to federal court) to place a lien on the federal case. So he ws not a good faith buyer purchasing the default judgment which I see from the judgement was a prerequiste to the judge granting it. Additionally the motion for approval of sale of judgement and notice of intent to sell states that on Septemeber *, * the court granted the trustee's motion and reopened the chapter * case. Does this mean that James Cronan, especially, can argue the frudlent conveyance within the chapter * case and the subsequent default judgement being based on fraud?

Yes, James Cronan can argue fraudulent conveyance within the reopened Chapter * case and challenge the default judgment based on fraud. This would be done in the bankruptcy court.
Would you like to know how to file such a motion or need any specific guidance on this process?

Yes. Can we begin to draft the motion to cotest the writ of execution for James? Heres more information-James filed an answer to the advisary proceeding filed against him by the trustee in the case and then did not attend a hearing as a critical mistake. Howver following the judgement he met with the trustee's agent who told him that for $*,* he could pay to finalize the advisary proceeding. James howvever was in chapter * and indigent. He didnt have that amount. Additinally he believed that his CPA, Mr. greico, was represening him in the proceeding as the one who in the case advised him to move from chapter * to chapter * to release his sole ownership of a *.* m. commercial building promising that Jame's name would go back on it

To draft a motion to contest the writ of execution for James, it's crucial to address the key points:
- Misunderstanding or misrepresentation by his CPA.
- Indigency and inability to pay $*,*.
- No-show at the hearing due to misunderstanding.
- Potential fraud in the advisory proceeding.
Would you like a template or guidance on specific sections of the motion?

after Mr. Grieco and Mr. tiernan bought it from the court. James thought Mr. grieco as agreed was handeling the case. It turns out however that James was part of a schme to defraud. Mr Grieco and Mr. tienan now own the building. So I have the bill of sale between James orginal buisness Classic display purchased by Mr. grieco, CPA. Also The tape of the court's proceeding when Mr. grieco establishes that he is James' accounatnt and they are formimg a partnership, I have tax returns of two years showing James as an officer of the new company (they changed the name of Classic display) the Classic group Inc. , filed by Mr. grieco,I have the * shares that Mr. grieco advised James to transfer to Mr. tiernan (the other partner in the the Classic Group) promsssing to return the shares after Mr. tiernan uses it for a tax break, I have the report from Lori horton a forensic CPA showing comminglingling of funds, tax evasion and

It sounds like you have strong evidence to challenge the fraudulent conveyance and the default judgment in the reopened Chapter * case.
Would you like guidance on drafting the motion to contest the writ of execution and highlight these crucial points?

embezzelment as James for several years did not get paid by Mr. Grieco and Mr. tiernan who took care of the day to day finances of James. Additionally james got threatened that if he didnt stop asking to put his name back on the commercial building that they would foreclose on Karen's property which was involved in the case. mr. grieco and Mr. tiernan as James' partners told James to move from chapter * to chapter * and have the building go up for sale Mr. Grieco and Mr. tiernan would buy it from the court and put james name back on it. ( I have that transfer). when they transferred it they had * fountain street as the new owner. * fountain st bought the default judgement. They never returned James name to the title of the building. Additionally Mr. tiernan destroyed all of James fiancial records and executed a self help eviction when he threw him out of the oartnership which ran out of the commercial buisling.

It sounds like you have a strong case involving significant allegations of fraud, embezzlement, and wrongful actions by your partners. Here are some steps you could consider:
- Draft a Motion to Contest Writ of Execution: Focus on the fraudulent activities, misrepresentation, and mismanagement by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan.
- File in the Reopened Chapter * Case: Use the evidence you have to argue against the default judgment and fraudulent conveyance.
- Consult a Bankruptcy Attorney: Given the complexity, professional guidance is crucial.
Would you like a template or specific sections for drafting the motion?

please draft the motion

Sure, here’s a draft for the Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution. Please remember to consult with an attorney for a thorough review.
---

United States Bankruptcy Court

[District of Rhode Island]
In re:
James Cronan, Debtor
Case No.: [Insert Case Number]
James Cronan, Movant
v.
* Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan, Respondent
MOTION TO CONTEST WRIT OF EXECUTION
NOW COMES Movant, James Cronan, and hereby files this Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution issued by the Court in favor of Respondent, * Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:
*. Background
- In *, a default judgment was entered against Movant in favor of the Trustee in the Chapter * case.
- The judgment was based on allegations of fraud, and Movant did not attend the hearing due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation by CPA Mr. Grieco.
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by Mr. Tiernan for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages in a lawsuit that Movant has against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.
*. Misrepresentation and Mismanagement
- Movant was advised by Mr. Grieco to move from Chapter * to Chapter * under the promise that his sole ownership of a $*.* million commercial building would be restored after the sale.
- After the transfer, Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan failed to return Movant’s name to the title of the building and instead transferred ownership to * Fountain Street.
- Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan engaged in fraudulent activities, including embezzlement, commingling of funds, and tax evasion, as evidenced by forensic CPA Lori Horton’s report.
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee’s agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed

Send me now only from * onward keeping without the borderline

Please contine by sending me from section *. Indigency and Financial Hardship onward.

---
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee's agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, causing further financial hardship.
*. Threats and Coercion
- Movant was threatened by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan to stop asking to put his name back on the commercial building, under threat of foreclosure on Karen’s property.
- Movant was coerced into moving from Chapter * to Chapter * based on false promises that the building ownership would be restored.
*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, Movant respectfully requests that this Court grant the Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution and provide such other and further relief as the Courtdeems just and proper.
---
Respectfully Submitted,
James Cronan
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]
---
Do you need any additional sections or details for this motion?

Can you please establish an Evience section citing the evidence I provided.

Sure, here is the Evidence section:
---
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee's agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, causing further financial hardship.
*. Threats and Coercion
- Movant was threatened by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan to stop asking to put his name back on the commercial building, under threat of foreclosure on Karen’s property.
- Movant was coerced into moving from Chapter * to Chapter * based on false promises that the building ownership would be restored.
*. Evidence
- Bill of Sale: Document showing the transfer of ownership of James' original business, Classic Display, to Mr. Grieco.
- Court Tape: Recording of the court proceedings where Mr. Grieco establishes himself as James' accountant and partner.
- Tax Returns: Two years of tax returns filed by Mr. Grieco showing James as an officer of the new company, The Classic Group Inc.
- Share Transfer: Evidence of the transfer of * shares from James to Mr. Tiernan under the promise of a tax break.
- Forensic CPA Report: Report by Lori Horton showing commingling of funds, tax evasion, and embezzlement.
- Threats and Coercion: Evidence of threats made by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, including documentation of the self-help eviction and foreclosure threats.
- Building Ownership Transfer: Documentation of the transfer of the commercial building to * Fountain Street and the failure to return ownership to James.
*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, Movant respectfully requests that this Court grant the Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution and provide such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
James Cronan
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Phone

threats ans coercion It was just James and Mr. tiernan and Mr. Grico thereat the time when the threat happened. Can I provide Jame's affidavit? Additionally Mr. Tiernan made good on his threat and forclsoed on Karen's property. I can show the forclsoure deed . Additionally I have the complaint filed in federal court agaisnt Mr. tienan for an illegal forclosure.

Yes, you can definitely provide James' affidavit as evidence. Here are the steps and additional information you may include:
- Include James’ affidavit detailing the threats made by Mr. Tiernan and Mr. Grieco.
- Attach the foreclosure deed as evidence of Mr. Tiernan making good on his threat.
- Attach the complaint filed in federal court against Mr. Tiernan for the illegal foreclosure.
Would you like assistance in drafting James' affidavit or including these documents in your motion?

please update the evidence and this information to the write sections or add another section and then resend the revise motion.. Additionally in the order granting motion for approval of sale of judgements pursuaint to * U.S.C. section * and notice of intent to sell judgements by Private sale and invitation for competing Bids It staes on section * thec ourt relies on "that all terms and conditions of sad sale are fair and commecially resonale, that the Buyer is a good faith pruchaser under * U.S.C. * (m), that the sale is in the best interest of the cort and

Sure, here is the revised motion including the new evidence and sections:
---
United States Bankruptcy Court
[District of Rhode Island]
In re:
James Cronan, Debtor
Case No.: [Insert Case Number]
James Cronan, Movant
v.
* Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan, Respondent
MOTION TO CONTEST WRIT OF EXECUTION
NOW COMES Movant, James Cronan, and hereby files this Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution issued by the Court in favor of Respondent, * Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:
*. Background
- In *, a default judgment was entered against Movant in favor of the Trustee in the Chapter * case.
- The judgment was based on allegations of fraud, and Movant did not attend the hearing due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation by CPA Mr. Grieco.
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by Mr. Tiernan for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages in a lawsuit that Movant has against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.
*. Misrepresentation and Mismanagement
- Movant was advised by Mr. Grieco to move from Chapter * to Chapter * under the promise that his sole ownership of a $*.* million commercial building would be restored after the sale.
- After the transfer, Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan failed to return Movant’s name to the title of the building and instead transferred ownership to * Fountain Street.
- Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan engaged in fraudulent activities, including embezzlement, commingling of funds, and tax evasion, as evidenced by forensic CPA Lori Horton’s report.
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee's agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, causing further financial hardship

creditors. Howver this is false as the Buyer defrauded the estate in the case having manipuated the proceedings to buy a commercial building for $*,* which is now valued at roughly $*.5m by inducing James by a breach of fiduciary duty. In addition in the motion filed by * Fountain street for issuance of a writ of execution mr. Beal Esq, states "Pursuaint to the assignment of the judgement , * Fountain is now the j Creditoe , and requests issuance of a Writ of Exection on the judgement. This is false under Rule *(b)* fraud on the court as * fountain street is a debtor in a federal llawsuitand using this defalt judgement to offset his damages from an illegal foresloure agaisnt the creditor karen Merritt. Therby this writ of execution is establis for a fruadlent conveyance .

Sure, here is the updated motion including the new evidence and information:
---
United States Bankruptcy Court
[District of Rhode Island]
In re:
James Cronan, Debtor
Case No.: [Insert Case Number]
James Cronan, Movant
v.
* Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan, Respondent
MOTION TO CONTEST WRIT OF EXECUTION
NOW COMES Movant, James Cronan, and hereby files this Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution issued by the Court in favor of Respondent, * Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:
*. Background
- In *, a default judgment was entered against Movant in favor of the Trustee in the Chapter * case.
- The judgment was based on allegations of fraud, and Movant did not attend the hearing due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation by CPA Mr. Grieco.
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by Mr. Tiernan for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages ina lawsuit that Movant has against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.
*. Misrepresentation and Mismanagement
- Movant was advised by Mr. Grieco to move from Chapter * to Chapter * under the promise that his sole ownership of a $*.* million commercial building would be restored after the sale.
- After the transfer, Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan failed to return Movant’s name to the title of the building and instead transferred ownership to * Fountain Street.
- Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan engaged in fraudulent activities, including embezzlement, commingling of funds, and tax evasion, as evidenced by forensic CPA Lori Horton’s report.
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee's agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, causing further financial hardship.
*. **Threats

No only send me from section * onward keeping without the borderline.

*. Threats and Coercion
- Movant was threatened by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan to stop asking to put his name back on the commercial building, under threat of foreclosure on Karen’s property.
- Movant was coerced into moving from Chapter * to Chapter * based on false promises that the building ownership would be restored.
- James’ affidavit detailing the threats made by Mr. Tiernan and Mr. Grieco is included.
*. Evidence
- Bill of Sale: Document showing the transfer of ownership of James' original business, Classic Display, to Mr. Grieco.
- Court Tape: Recording of the court proceedings where Mr. Grieco establishes himself as James' accountant and partner.
- Tax Returns: Two years of tax returns filed by Mr. Grieco showing James as an officer of the new company, The Classic Group Inc.
- Share Transfer: Evidence of the transfer of * shares from James to Mr. Tiernan under the promise of a tax break.
- Forensic CPA Report: Report by Lori Horton showing commingling of funds, tax evasion, and embezzment.
- Foreclosure Deed: Document showing the foreclosure on Karen’s property as a result of Mr. Tiernan's threats.
- Federal Complaint: Complaint filed in federal court against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure.
- Order Granting Motion for Approval of Sale: Document showing the court's reliance on false representations about the sale's fairness and the buyer's good faith under * U.S.C. *(m).
- Motion Filed by * Fountain Street: Document showing false statements under Rule *(b)*, indicating fraud on the court.
*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, Movant respectfully requests that this Court grant the Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution and provide such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
James Cronan
[Your Address]
[City,

Revise pleas On September *, * , this court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case [Doc. *]. so lets revise request Movant seeks an declarartory judgement act confiming that On September *, * , this court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case [Doc. *]. Or should we just act like it has been opened. And request a hearing?

It would be best to request a declaratory judgment confirming that the court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case on September *, *. This ensures clarity and avoids any assumptions. Here’s a draft for your revised request:
---
United States Bankruptcy Court
[District of Rhode Island]
In re:
James Cronan, Debtor
Case No.: [Insert Case Number]
James Cronan, Movant
v.
* Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan, Respondent
MOTION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
NOW COMES Movant, James Cronan, and hereby seeks a declaratory judgment confirming that on September *, *, this Court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case [Doc. *]. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:
*. On September *, *, this Court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case [Doc. *].
*. Movant seeks confirmation of this action to ensure all proceedings are based on the accurate status of the case.
Request for Hearing
Movant also requests a hearing to address this matter and any related issuesthat may require the Court's attention.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, Movant respectfully requests that this Court grant the declaratory judgment confirming that the Trustee's Motion was granted and the case was reopened on September *, *, and provide such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
James Cronan
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]
---
Would you like any further assistance with this motion or any other documents?

see above

Here is the revised motion including the additional information:
---
United States Bankruptcy Court
[District of Rhode Island]
In re:
James Cronan, Debtor
Case No.: [Insert Case Number]
James Cronan, Movant
v.
* Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan, Respondent
MOTION TO CONTEST WRIT OF EXECUTION
NOW COMES Movant, James Cronan, and hereby files this Motion to Contest the Writ of Execution issued by the Court in favor of Respondent, * Fountain Street, Assignee Mr. Tiernan. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:
*. Background
- In *, a default judgment was entered against Movant in favor of the Trustee in the Chapter * case.
- The judgment was based on allegations of fraud, and Movant did not attend the hearing due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation by CPA Mr. Grieco.
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by Mr. Tiernan for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages in a lawsuit that Movanthas against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.
*. Misrepresentation and Mismanagement
- Movant was advised by Mr. Grieco to move from Chapter * to Chapter * under the promise that his sole ownership of a $*.* million commercial building would be restored after the sale.
- After the transfer, Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan failed to return Movant’s name to the title of the building and instead transferred ownership to * Fountain Street.
- Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan engaged in fraudulent activities, including embezzlement, commingling of funds, and tax evasion, as evidenced by forensic CPA Lori Horton’s report.
*. Indigency and Financial Hardship
- Movant was indigent and unable to pay the $*,* demanded by the Trustee's agent to finalize the adversary proceeding.
- Movant’s financial records were destroyed by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan, causing further financial hardship.
*. Threats and Coercion

please only send me the revised section and I will make the orrection in the motion.

---
*. Request for Declaratory Judgment
- Movant seeks a declaratory judgment confirming that on September *, *, this Court granted the Trustee's Motion and reopened the case [Doc. *].

*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
- Movant requests a hearing to present evidence and arguments supporting the motion.
---

- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco and Mr. Tiernan. should we include * fountain Street LLC.

Yes, you should include * Fountain Street LLC in your motion. Since they are directly involved in the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation, it is crucial to address their role in the case. Including them ensures that all relevant parties are held accountable.
Do you need assistance with any specific sections or details for this motion?

Please only update section * if thats where to ad * Fountain Street

Sure, here is the revised section including * Fountain Street LLC:
---
*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, and * Fountain Street LLC.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
- Movant requests a hearing to present evidence and arguments supporting the motion.
---
Would you like further assistance with any other sections of the motion?

see above

---
*. Request for Relief
- Movant requests the Court to contest and set aside the Writ of Execution based on the fraudulent activities and misrepresentation by Mr. Grieco, Mr. Tiernan, and * Fountain Street LLC.
- Movant seeks an order to reopen the adversary proceeding and to challenge the default judgment on the grounds of fraud and mismanagement.
- Movant requests a hearing to present evidence and arguments supporting the motion.
---
Do you need any additional assistance with this motion?

Please revise only section * and send it to me-- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith. It was * fountain Street LLc and Mr. Tiernan as its assignee who purchased the judgement

Sure, here's the revised section * for you:
---
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by * Fountain Street LLC and Mr. Tiernan, as its assignee, for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages in a lawsuit that Movant has against them for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- Mr. Tiernan’s purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.
---
Would you like further assistance with any other sections?

see above

---
*. Fraudulent Conveyance
- The default judgment was purchased by * Fountain Street LLC and Mr. Tiernan as its assignee for $*,*, significantly below its value of $*,*, to offset damages in a lawsuit that Movant has against Mr. Tiernan for illegal foreclosure, usury violations, breach of contract, and violations under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A.
- The purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith.

Please revise section * only- The purchase of the judgment was not made in good faith as reguired .under * U.S.C. * (m) as a prereguiste for the court to order the writ of exection.

Please revise this - Motion Filed by * Fountain Street: Document showing false statements under Rule *(b)*, indicating fraud on the court- * Fountain Street LLC"S Motion for Issuance of writ of exection falsely claimed that * founatin was a Crecitor "and reguests issunace of a Writ of Exection when in fact they were a debtor in the act of a fraudlent conveyanc (please stae the bankruptcy's rile ) in the commission to defraud a creditor, Karen Merritt , one of the movants in this case.

---
Motion Filed by * Fountain Street: Document showing false statements under Rule *(b)(*), indicating fraud on the court.
* Fountain Street LLC's Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution falsely claimed that * Fountain was a creditor and requested issuance of a Writ of Execution when, in fact, they were a debtor in the act of a fraudulent conveyance, in violation of bankruptcy rules, to defraud a creditor, Karen Merritt, one of the movants in this case.
---
Do you have any additional details or need further assistance with this motion?

please state the bankruptcy's rule

Sure, here is the revised section including the bankruptcy rule:
---
*. Evidence
- Bill of Sale: Document showing the transfer of ownership of James' original business, Classic Display, to Mr. Grieco.
- Court Tape: Recording of the court proceedings where Mr. Grieco establishes himself as James' accountant and partner.
- Tax Returns: Two years of tax returns filed by Mr. Grieco showing James as an officer of the new company, The Classic Group Inc.
- Share Transfer: Evidence of the transfer of * shares from James to Mr. Tiernan under the promise of a tax break.
- Forensic CPA Report: Report by Lori Horton showing commingling of funds, tax evasion, and embezzlement.
- Foreclosure Deed: Document showing the foreclosure on Karen’s property as a result of Mr. Tiernan's threats.
- Federal Complaint: Complaint filed in federal court against Mr. Tiernanfor illegal foreclosure.
- Order Granting Motion for Approval of Sale: Document showing the court's reliance on false representations about the sale's fairness and the buyer's good faith under * U.S.C. *(m).
- * Fountain Street LLC's Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution: Document showing false statements under Rule *(b)(*), indicating fraud on the court. The motion falsely claimed that * Fountain Street LLC was a "Creditor" and requested issuance of a Writ of Execution when in fact they were a debtor involved in a fraudulent conveyance to defraud a creditor, Karen Merritt, one of the movants in this case.
---
Do you need any more assistance with this motion?

Can you update the background and send it to me with this- The judgement entered for damages and Karen cronan. (now Karen Merritt) in the Adversary proceedings. The judgement entered against Cronan was of $*,*.* plus *% interest and Merritt for damages in the amount of $*,*. plus *% interest.

Sure, here is the updated background section including the new information:
---
*. Background
- In *, a default judgment was entered against Movant, James Cronan, in favor of the Trustee in the Chapter * case.
- The judgment entered for damages against James Cronan was $*,*.* plus *% interest and against Karen Cronan (now Karen Merritt) for damages in the amount of $*,* plus *% interest in the Adversary proceedings.
- The judgment was based on allegations of fraud, and Movant did not attend the hearing due to misunderstanding and misrepresentation by CPA Mr. Grieco.
Do you need any further adjustments or additional information for this motion?

I wrote a motion to contest the writ of execution do you want me to send it to you to determine if you add it to Jame's or keep it separate/

It seems like you've compiled a strong case with substantial evidence. For clarity, it's probably best to keep the motions separate, focusing one on James' issues and the other on Karen's, if applicable. This can help streamline the arguments and evidence specific to each party's case.
Would you like help reviewing your motion to contest the writ of execution, or do you have any other specific questions?

Federal Court Removal Timeline

Summary

Full Conversation

Related Chats