Defendants Claim Trustee’s Complaint Lacks Sufficient Details
Download the full pdf of the motion by clicking: here
September 02, 2022, US Bankruptcy Court for Northern Texas – Jupiter Brownsville LLC, JEG Holdings, LLC, et al. (“Defendants”), file a motion to dismiss the adversary proceedings brought by Daniel J. Sherman – Debtor’s appointed trustee (“Trustee”) – against the Defendants to avoid and recover alleged “preferential” and “fraudulent” transfers.
The motion claims that the Trustee’s complaint impermissibly “lumps together” the Defendants in its allegations. According to the motion, the complaint allegedly did not assert specific, well-pleaded allegations against each separate Defendant.
The motion claims that the Trustee’s complaint allegedly fails to satisfy the legal standards of pleading provided in the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The Defendants make the following arguments in support of their 12(b)(6) motion:
- The Trustee allegedly fails to plead that Defendant was a creditor of the Debtor to assert a “fraudulent” transfer claim under TUFTA § 24.006(a).
- The motion claims that the Trustee allegedly does not break down the transfers sufficiently to show that the Debtor allegedly did not receive reasonably equivalent value for each transfer.
- The Trustee allegedly does not provide details of the alleged transfers that the Trustee seeks to avoid.
- The Trustee allegedly does not provide any factual support to his claim that the Debtor was allegedly “insolvent” at the time of the alleged transfers.
The Defendants contend that the Trustee’s complaint allegedly only includes recitation of the elements and “bare legal conclusions”. The Defendants plead the above-stated arguments to seek dismissal of all the claims asserted against them in the Trustee’s complaint.
Daniel J. Sherman, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Jupiter Brownsville LLC, et al., (In re JupiterMLP, LLC), AP No. 22-03066, US Bankruptcy Court for Northern Texas
