www.alphonsemourad.com
www.uscorruptjudges.com
www.bostonmandelascandal.com

United States Bankruptcy Court
District of Massachusetts
(Eastern Division)

Chapter11
IN RE:

Case No. 96-10123-CJK

V&M Management, Inc.
Debtor

MOTION TO COMPEL THE COURT TO
ORDER THE RESIGNATION OF ASST. U.S.
TRUSTEE ATTORNEY, ERIC BRADFORD, and
STRIKE BRADFORD'S OPPOSITION TO MOURAD'S MOTION FOR RECUSAL

Now comes Alphonse Mourad, founder, officer, stockholder, creditor, and party in
interest in the Debtor, V&M Management, Inc., and moves this Court (Kenner, C.J.), to order the resignation of Assistant United States Trustee Attorney, Eric Bradford, and strike Bradford's Opposition to Mourad's Motion For Recusal, due to his predetermined, biased disposition, and for his role in recommending the appointment of a not disinterested Trustee, Stephen Gray.
In support, Mourad states:

1. On April 1, 1996, a hearing was held on the Motion to Appoint a Trustee. Eric Bradford of the U.S. Trustee's Office made a grossly improper reference to the misleading front page article in that day's The Boston Globe about Mourad, and the Court's decision to remove Mourad from the Mandela development before the hearing was even held (see Exhibit "1"). This remark was improper and prejudicial and demonstrated Bradford's inability to fairly judge me or his role in the bankruptcy.

2. Mourad believe the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA), an agency who has been trying for over a decade to take control over the Mandela Apartments, planted this front page article to taint the hearing and gain an unfair advantage. The BRA strategy worked. Michael Grunwald of The Boston Globe was informed by the March 12, 1996 letter of Eddirland Duncan, former assistant counsel for V&M, as to the true nature of the financial status of V&M Management for year ended 1995. The Duncan letter states that Mourad's "Net Withdrawal was only $61,856" (see Exhibit "2"). The Boston Globe had printed that Mourad stole over $900,000 from V&M. Newspapers, especially The Boston Globe, are not a proper or accurate source of evidence. Bradford was wrong to have referred to the article, and wrong to have used the inaccurate information from it.

3. This inappropriate reference to the The Boston Globe article was only the beginning of a long downward spiraling of highly inflammatory actions and responses from Mr. Bradford. In fact, Mr. Bradford made an inane argument about his own study of "logic and rhetoric," Mourad's "offense-defense" approach, and even invoked Richard Nixon's "Checkers speech." All of this from a man who had no personal knowledge of Mourad.

4. Bradford's argument even confused the Court, not knowing whether Bradford supported the appointment of a Trustee or supported authorizing an Examiner with expanded powers as a less drastic and more appropriate remedy than the "extraordinary," last resort remedy of a Trustee. Shamefully and embarrassingly realizing his error, Bradford apologized to Court for his improper reference and comments, thus acknowledging his harmful remarks. But his apology did not correct the wrong. Bradford should have withdrawn from the case that day, and the Court should not have allowed Attorney Bradford to recommend or have the U.S. Trustee appoint Stephen S. Gray as the Trustee, or to further participate in the case.

5. Eric Bradford continued his assault against Mourad on December 23, 1996, in a room full of witnesses, including former Senator William Owens, Thelma Barros, and Bill Ferguson, the director of the Schiller Institute, when Bradford boldly stated, "You took a million dollars in 1995 Al, you are a fraud, and you are using the tenants for your own personal gain and benefit ." This defamatory, biased, and unsupportable statement is a clear example of the negative and tainted picture that has been painted of Mourad. These remarks are representative of a tabloid newspaper and should not find themselves present in a federal courthouse. Mourad challenges Bradford or any individual or party to provide any evidence or information that proves that he is a fraud. It cannot be done because it simply is not true. What guilty man approaches the FBI to expose the corruption of the governmental entities when he is accused of taking approximately $1 million dollars in federally subsidized funds? If Mourad had taken the federal money that he had been accused of taking, why hasn't he been indicted, convicted or imprisoned? Furthermore, he has proof that he did not take $1,000,000 from V&M Management in 1995, as Eric Bradford so erroneously stated. In a May 9, 1997 letter, certified public accountant Steven Slavin writes "After having reviewed the V&M Management, Inc. federal corporate income tax return prepared by Verdolino & Lowey, for the year ended December 31, 1995, distribution to shareholders (Mourad) was only $63,831" (see Exhibit "3"). Interestingly, Verdolino & Lowey are retained by Trustee Gray and are not V&M's accountants, yet they also claim that Mourad only took $63,831 from V&M for 1995; a total contradiction to the Court's April 1, 1996 finding that I took $923,000 from V&M in 1995, which "constituted gross mismanagement", thus giving the Court reason to appoint a Trustee.

6. With all of the evidence disclosed to the Bankruptcy Court (Carol J. Kenner) and to all parties involved in this case, including Eric Bradford, clarifying this Court's erroneous findings and conclusions from the April 1, 1996 order appointing a Trustee, and the fact that V&M was forced to file bankruptcy due to the denial of an injunction against a foreclosure on fraudulent and forged note, verified by a hand-writing forensics examiner (see Exhibit "4," May 27, 1997 Affidavit of Ronald H. Rice, certified forensics examiner), Bradford still continued to support the BRA, DOR, City of Boston in their efforts to seize the Mandela Apartments for their new urban renewal plan.

7. Bradford has not protected the interests of V&M's estate or its creditors. The U.S Trustee's Office did not even organize a creditors' committee. Bradford kept silent the entire time the Trustee Gray devalued the property, and did not dispute Trustee Gray's ridiculous under valuation of $100,000. Obviously, if that was the true valuation of the estate, then the estate is in far worse condition than it was before Bradford entered the case and made his ridiculous accusations and recommendations to the Bankruptcy Court. How could a 276 unit development located only a few miles away from downtown Boston be worth only $100,000?

8. In a June 3, 1997 letter from certified accountant Steven Slavin, he states that the "total Net Income for the year ended 1996 is $1,063,994" (see Exhibit "5"). This automatlicy demonstrates that the property is worth far more than $100,000, and that the Trustee wants to keep every dime of the $1,063,994 for himself at the expense of the creditors. Bradford has made no objection to any action Trustee Gray has taken since his appointment.

9. As a representative of the U.S. Trustee Office, Eric Bradford is responsible for, and has the power to investigate and dispute any mismanagement that the appointed Trustee commits, any fraud or other criminal activity that has been committed involving the estate prior to, and during the bankruptcy, and ultimately has a responsibility to ensure the highest possible dollar for the creditors of the estate. Bradford has failed to follow through with any of these responsibilities, and failed to protect all of the innocent parties in this case.

10. Bradford, after having been notified by Mourad, failed to investigate the malicious actions of two political State judges, Judge Maria I. Lopez and Judge Charles T. Spurlock. On September 15, 1995, V&M and Mourad were granted an injunction against Mario Nicosia's foreclosure attempt by Middlesex Superior Court Justice Catherine White, who ruled that L&N and Nicosia were enjoined from foreclosing and that the case was to be transferred and combined with two other cases involving V&M pending in the Suffolk Superior Court, see Exhibit " 6."

11. On November 29, 1995, in a very questionable action, Suffolk Superior Court Justice Maria Lopez vacated Judge White's injunction despite the fact that on October 17, 1995, HUD, through the United States Attorney for Massachusetts, removed the combined cases from the Superior Court to the Federal District Court, see Exhibit "7". Judge Lopez, in effect, made an erroneous ruling in a case where she had lacked jurisdiction.

12. Prior to a hearing scheduled for January 5, 1996, Robert J. Rosenburg, representing L&N and Mario Nicosia, and in open violation of Rule 9A, wrote to Judge Charles T. Spurlock, see Exhibit "8," who was pending over the case, wherein he made unsubstantiated and inflammatory remarks about Mourad. Judge Spurlock referred to these comments in his opening remarks, see Exhibit " 9," January 5, 1996 Transcript.

13. On January 5, 1996, the hearing was held before Judge Spurlock to enjoin yet another Nicosia attempt to foreclose on V&M. Judge Spurlock barley aloud V&M's council, Michael Altman, to speak, and erroneously denied the injunction, despite the fact Nicosia and his attorney's presented a fraudulent and forged note, upon which the hearing was being held; again see Exhibit " 9," January 5, 1996 Transcript, and Exhibit " 10," Affidavit of Michael Altman. Bradford was informed of these circumstances surrounding Judge Lopez and Judge Spurlock and did nothing to protect Mourad or V&M.

14. Bradford also ignored a twelve million dollar law suit that had been filed by V&M entitled V&M Management, Inc. v. Henry Cisneros, HUD, see Exhibit " 11." Had V&M won this law suit, V&M's creditors would have been paid in full. The case was eventually dismissed for lack of prosecution because Trustee Gray failed to proceed with the action.

15. That Bradford supported the Joint Plan of Reorganization filed by the Trustee, DOR, Winter Hill Federal Savings Bank, Beacon Residential Properties, and the Mandela Residents Cooperative Association is further evidence of his biased disposition. That plan paid the unsecured creditors only 9 cents on the dollar. If Bradford's primary concern was for the creditors, he should have supported the dismissal of the case so that V&M Management, Inc. could refinance and pay all of the undisputed creditors 100% on their principal. He also failed to consider other plans of reorganization, such as the Plan proposed by Gary Leroy and Mourad, Owens & Associates, which offers a significantly larger amount of money (40% more) than the Trustee's and Beacon's Plan.

16. On April 2, 1996, Judge Kenner confirmed the appointment of Stephen Gray as Chapter 11 Trustee. The recommendation for Grays appointment was put forward Eric Bradford. It should also be noted that Harold Murphy of Hanify & King was retained and served as Council to V&M Management while simultaneously representing Stephen Gray in another bankruptcy in the same Court, before the same Judge (Carol J. Kenner).

17. After Mourad had found out Murphy was representing Gray at the same time as V&M, Murphy and Hanify & King said that Hanify & King was "familiar with Mr. Gray through involvements together in chapter 7 cases, chapter 11 cases and work-out matters." Yet, Murphy and Hanify & King did not say that Hanify & King "represented" Gray in any on-going cases.

18. What is perhaps the most scandalous aspect of this case is that Bradford appointed Gray as Chapter 7 Trustee to the Patriot Paper Case prior to the V&M Case. How this triangle was allowed to form remains a mystery. Basically, Bradford knew that Murphy was simultaneously representing V&M and Mr. Gray, which constitutes a major conflict of interest. Gray perjured him self twice by signing two sworn affidavits saying he has no connection with the debtor or the debtors attorneys. Bradford is aware of this undisputed fact and has done nothing about it. Furthermore, Murphy is currently under investigation by the Office of the Bar Council for his simultaneous representation of Gray and V&M, see Exhibit "12." The duplicitous relationship between Murphy and Gray was condoned by Mr. Bradford whose duty it is to preserve the integrity of the bankruptcy proceedings. This incestuous relationship has tainted the proceedings and cost Mourad his livelihood and V&M's creditors millions of dollars, for they only received about 9 cent on the dollar.

19. Mourad is downhearted to say that he and his family, including many non-immediate relatives such as cousins and nephews, are completely bankrupt, and he had lost his home as well as everything he owned as a result of Eric Bradford's immoral and corrupt actions. He has taken 15 years of Mourad's life and investment from him, and he must be punished.

20. Had Eric Bradford followed through with his responsibilities, sought the assistance of the U.S. Attorney and FBI, and investigated the matters of fraud and forgery committed by Mario Nicosia, perjury committed by Stephen S. Gray, Hanify & King, and Harold Murphy, investigated the conspiracy of the BRA, DOR, the Attorney General's Office, and the City of Boston to steel my development, and investigated the misrepresentation of the 1981 sale from HUD, which is within his power, and, in which all of the evidence and documentation had been properly served and presented to him, V&M would not of lost its property and it would have been able to pay all of its creditors in full.

21. Some of the evidence and documentation that had been served to Bradford include:
Exhibit "13" The June 5, 1997 Affidavit of Othello Mahone, which illustrates the entire history of V&M Management and how V&M was victimized and discriminated against by the above mentioned entities.
Exhibit "14" The Chapter 11 Trustee's Objection To Motion To Approve Stipulation Of Settlement Between Debtor, Alphonse Mourad, and Mario Nicosia, in which Stephen Gray states "The Debtor (V&M) actually paid in full, or even overpaid, the amounts lawfully due to the Trustees (Nicosia and Moriarty)," and Bradford contradicted Gray and supported Nicosia's claim for over $1,000,000.
Exhibit "15" Mourad's April 2, 1998 Complaint against Harold Murphy and Hanify & King to The Office of the Bar Counsel.

22. Finally, Eric Bradford is in absolutely no position to defend Judge Kenner in this case, for he himself is currently under investigation by Joseph Patchan, Director of The Executive Office For U.S. Trustee's Office of General Counsel, see Exhibit "16," and is potentially facing serious consequences.
WHEREFORE, Mourad respectfully requests that this Court order the resignation of the Asst. U.S. Trustee Attorney, Eric Bradford, due to his biased, and personal prejudicial disposition against Mourad and V&M Management, Inc. and strike his Opposition to Mourad's Motion For Recusal.
_______________________________
Alphonse Mourad
125 West Street
Hyde Park, MA 02136

June 30, 1998

Home

Contact Info