{"id":"court_ctb_2202_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2202,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"TRANSCRIPT","filed_date":"2023-09-15","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KW","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"Case 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 1 of 34\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK and GENEVER \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut HOLDINGS CORPORATION, \\* September 12, 2023 \\* Debtor. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC A. DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For the Chapter 11 Trustee: G. ALEXANDER BONGARTZ, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, CT 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 2 of 34\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd) For the Chapter 11 Trustee: PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Neubert Pepe and Monteith 195 Church Street,13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 For the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of U.S. Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 For the Creditors Committee: KRISTEN B. MAYHEW, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601 For The Sherry-Netherland, SHERRY J. MILLMAN, ESQ. Creditor: Stroock & Stroock & Lavan 180 Maiden Lane New York, NY 10038 TARUNA GARG, ESQ. Murtha Cullina, LLP 107 Elm Street, Suite 1101 Stamford, CT 06902 For the Pacific Alliance ANNECCA H. SMITH, ESQ. Asia Opportunity Fund, LP: Robinson & Cole, LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\n2\n\n| #2051 | INTERIM APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION FOR PAUL
HASTINGS LLP, TRUSTEE'S ATTORNEY, |\n|-------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | FEE: \\$8,251.634.83, EXPENSES: \\$213,914.83 |\n| #2053 | INTERIM APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION (SECOND |\n| | INTERIM) FOR NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C., |\n| | TRUSTEE'S ATTORNEY, FEE: \\$357,587.50, |\n| | EXPENSES: \\$10,402.59 |\n| #2110 | JOINT MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE AN DEBTORS |\n| | GENEVER US AND GENEVER BVI FOR ENTRY OF FINAL |\n| | ORDER (I) AUTHORIZING CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE TO EXTEND |\n| | FINANCING PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTION 363, |\n| | (II) AUTHORIZING GENEVER US AND GENEVER BVI TO |\n| | OBTAIN POST-PETITION FINANCING PURSUANT TO |\n| | BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTION 364, (III) GRANTING NON |\n| | PRIMING LIENS AND PROVIDING SUPERPRIORITY |\n| | ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE CLAIM, (IV) MODIFYING |\n| | AUTOMATIC STAY AND (V) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF |\n| | |\n\n3\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 4 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 4 (Proceedings commenced at 2:04 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. THE COURT: Good afternoon. If we could have appearances for the record starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee, please. Do you think no one can hear us? I think no one can hear us. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Well, that's strange because we're recording. I don't see anything wrong. THE COURT: I'm not on mute. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: I'm not on mute either. THE COURT: Can anyone hear us? MR. DESPINS: Yes, now. THE COURT: Oh, now he can. Okay. So we're going to have the courtroom deputy call the case again, please. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Okay. Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. THE COURT: Good afternoon. If we could have appearances for the record starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee, please. MR. DESPINS: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. BONGARTZ: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Alex\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 5 Bongartz of Paul Hastings for the Chapter 11 Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey of Neubert, Pepe and Monteith, counsel for the Trustee and other debtors, and also for the fee application of (indiscernible). THE COURT: Okay. Hold on just a minute because your audio is coming through the computers and not through the speakers. Do you both hear that that issue? Do you? THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: I hear that they're lower. THE COURT: Yeah. They're not coming through the speakers. They're coming through the computer. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: I don't see anything that's wrong though. I don't see what could be wrong. Wait a minute. Let me just ask Will. (Pause) THE COURT: All right. Hold on, everybody, just a moment, please, which is one of the reasons we hold hearings in person. But it didn't work that way today, so hold on, please. (Pause) THE COURT: It's going to take just a couple of minutes to fix this problem. So if everyone can just hold on, please. Thank you. (Pause) Case 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 5 of 34\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 6 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
6 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So can everyone hear me now? |\n| 2 | All right.
Somebody speak and let's see if we make sure it |\n| 3 | goes through the right speakers, please. |\n| 4 | Mr. Despins, would you say something, please. |\n| 5 | MR. DESPINS:
Testing 123, testing. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Is that right?
That's right.
Okay. |\n| 7 | Good.
Now we can pick up the record appropriately.
Sorry. |\n| 8 | All right.
So we had taken Mr. Despins' |\n| 9 | appearance and Mr. Linsey's appearance, so please continue. |\n| 10 | Mr. Bongartz, you want to go next? |\n| 11 | MR. BONGARTZ:
Sure.
This is Alex Bongartz again |\n| 12 | from Paul Hastings on behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. |\n| 13 | Thank you. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 15 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| 16 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 18 | MS. MAYHEW:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Kristen |\n| 19 | Mayhew, Pullman & Comley, on behalf of the Official |\n| 20 | Committee of Unsecured Creditors. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 22 | MS. MILLMAN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Sherry |\n| 23 | Millman with Stroock & Stroock & Lavan on behalf of the |\n| 24 | Sherry-Netherland. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Attorney Millman, when you speak |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 7 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 7 again, if you do, if you can just get closer to your mike because it was just very muffled. Okay? And as you know, just because we have audio, if it's muffled, the reporter can't pick it up. So you don't have to say it again, but if you do say anything else, if you just get closer to your microphone I'd appreciate that. Go ahead, Attorney Garg. Sorry. MS. GARG: Good afternoon, Your Honor. It's okay, Your Honor. Good afternoon. Taruna Garg on behalf of the Sherry-Netherland. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MS. SMITH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Annecca Smith, Connecticut counsel for PAX. THE COURT: Good afternoon. Okay. Thank you all for being here. When we were looking at the calendar yesterday, we did notice that the matters on the calendar had objection deadlines and no objections were filed. And as Trustee Despins has pointed out in the past, there are certain times when a remote hearing might be possible in order, for many reasons, but one of which is in order to save time and money for the estate. And since none of the matters on the calendar today were objected to, under that specific circumstance, I decided that we would hold these hearings remotely today.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 8 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
8 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Now, I think the first two, the applications for |\n| 2 | compensation, are fairly straightforward.
I think the DIP |\n| 3 | motion is fairly straightforward, although it may need more |\n| 4 | of an explanation for the record. |\n| 5 | So Trustee Despins, do you want to commence with |\n| 6 | the compensation applications first? |\n| 7 | MR. DESPINS:
It's up to you, Your Honor.
I was |\n| 8 | going to start with the DIP, but I -- but wherever you want |\n| 9 | to do. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
You go ahead then.
Start with the DIP |\n| 11 | first then -- |\n| 12 | MR. DESPINS:
Okay. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
-- which is -- |\n| 14 | MR. DESPINS:
Okay.
Your Honor, this is the DIP |\n| 15 | motion filed by the Kwok's estate and the two Genever |\n| 16 | debtors, and it's really a rescue loan from the Kwok estate |\n| 17 | to the Genever estates, and it is to provide, you know, case |\n| 18 | financing to the Genever debtors, mostly frankly Genever US, |\n| 19 | in the amount of up to \\$2 million.
And I'd like to provide |\n| 20 | some background on that. |\n| 21 | As Your Honor knows from prior hearings, Genever |\n| 22 | US has at this point probably around 20, \\$25,000 left in the |\n| 23 | bank.
And Genever BVI has no cash. |\n| 24 | And because the insurance company has not agreed |\n| 25 | to pay for the repairs caused by the fire, of course there's |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 9 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 9 litigation on that and that's pending and it's going to go forward, but that's going to take time and, you know, there are things that need to happen immediately to bring this apartment back to a level that is sufficient to sell it or to rent it, although the primary goal is to sell it, and that needs to happen now. And in a sense this motion should really have been heard, and it's on me for not having sequenced it at the same time as the renovation project motion, but they're related in a sense that most of the funding would go to the renovation project at the apartment. And the cost there of doing what they call a white boxing of the apartment, that means to clean up all the damage caused by the fire in that 20 percent area or so of the apartment, and white box that, not bring it back to the way it was, but really put, you know, put white sheetrock and reestablish all the connections of the piping, the plumbing, the electricity, et cetera. It sounds like it's pretty simple, but it's not in the sense that do you need an architect to do that? Do you need an architect to supervise the various processes that needs to occur? There's asbestos that was discovered that needs to be remediated. And of course that motion is not before the Court, but I wanted you to understand the magnitude of the project\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 10 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 10 and why we're contemplating a loan of \\$2 million just essentially to finance that aspect of that case. And there's more to that in the sense that, yes, there will be professional fees for the counsel hired by Genever to pursue the AIG litigation and things like that, but most of the \\$2 million loan will be going towards the renovation project. And the reason why it can't wait is because this is like the Russian dolls. You know, basically you need to start with the smallest one and then put more and more and more. So we need to start immediately with the basic work that needs to be done obtaining the permits, et cetera, et cetera, otherwise a year will go by and we'll have done nothing. And of course we can't do that. So that's why we need the money now to finance this renovation project. And to be clear, as we said in the motion, the Kwok estate has no obligation to do this. The Kwok estate is doing this because it wants to preserve the ability to see proceeds from this apartment coming to it. And of course if it didn't lend the money, then this would end up being a total liquidation where no money may be going up to the Kwok estate level. And, therefore, the Kwok estate, you know, from that point of view, it makes sense to make that loan to preserve that ability.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 11 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 11 But this is not a risk-free loan. There are circumstances under which, Your Honor, this loan may not be repaid. I think that those circumstances will not happen, but that's certainly a possibility. And I've explained why, Your Honor. This loan, and I'll be very candid, Your Honor, is one-sided. You know, there are provisions there that you would never have with a commercial lender. For example, it says that the -- the lender is funding at its discretion, well, that means at my discretion as the Trustee, so that's not an arm's length, you know, loan, but that's because it's done in the spirit of -- for which it is intended. This is not to shore the recoveries of the Genever US creditors. This is to preserve the equity value potentially and, therefore, it is a one sided document. So the first part is that loans are made at my discretion. The payments may be made directly to the vendors. So for example, I don't have to send money to the Genever US account to pay for the architect. It can pay the architect directly and that will become a loan even though Genever US will not have actually touched the money. There are provisions like that, Your Honor. But as I said, this is not a risk-free loan and that's why we need to have these provisions. In addition to that, Your Honor, we've had\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 12 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 12 extensive negotiations with the Sherry-Netherland regarding this loan and their rights, because the Sherry-Netherland -- obviously we are -- the apartment is in the Sherry- Netherland, but the Sherry-Netherland is a secured creditor. They have a pledge of the shares and the rights under the lease, and we've agreed that they're senior to our loan. And we've agreed to other accommodations to them. But I would say that generally the Sherry- Netherland, their relationship to date has been extremely constructive, which is counter-intuitive a little bit in the sense that I'm sure a lot of people there are very upset about what happened, but they have been very, very helpful. As you can imagine, if we did not have their cooperation, this would be extremely difficult to do the renovation project and all that because there are so many hoops you have to jump through in New York. This is a union building, et cetera, et cetera. So the point is the Sherry-Netherland has been extremely supportive to date and I hope that this will continue. But as part of the DIP loan, we have reached some accomodation agreements with them that are reflected in the DIP order and I wanted to mention that to Your Honor. And Your Honor, we filed a proposed amended, revised amended order for the final DIP, which is at docket no. 2185. We filed that I believe yesterday. And the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 13 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 13 changes, let me just go to the mark to show changes version, the changes are fairly minimal and they were mostly at the request of the U.S. Trustee. And there was a provision. I mentioned before that there were some accommodations or agreements reached with the Sherry-Netherland, and this would be on page 39 of 45 of docket 2185, so that's the marked changes version, but you'll see that paragraph 12 provides that we have the authority to pay the post-petition fees of the Sherry- Netherland, that means counsel for the Sherry-Netherland. And the U.S. Trustee requested, and we agreed, and the Sherry-Netherland also agreed, that prior to making these payments, Genever US will file a notice with the Court attaching the relevant invoices. There will be a time period for people to object. And if objections are filed, there will be a hearing. But that way there's a process for people to be heard if they disagree with the payments that would be made. By the way, this only gives us the authority. It does not direct us or obligate us to make these payments. But nevertheless there's a built-in provision now to allow people to object to that proposed payment, which is really the change that was reflected from the prior version of the order, which is now -- and then the order that revises this is document 2185, Your Honor.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 14 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 14 THE COURT: And at paragraph 12 of the ordered paragraphs, that's what you're talking about right now? MR. DESPINS: Correct. THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: And on the marked version, it's page 39 of 45, paragraph 12, authority to pay certain postage and fees. THE COURT: Yes, I see it. MR. DESPINS: So that, Your Honor, unless you have questions, I think that would complete the initial presentation. THE COURT: I have a few I think minor questions. So I think I heard you say, and I believe this is how I read it, but you can please correct me if I'm wrong, the money is being loaned to Genever USA -- US, but essentially you're going to pay it out of the Kwok estate all these expenses? MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. And Genever USA only has \\$20,000 in its operating account at this time, or somewhere -- I shouldn't say that -- an amount close to \\$20,000, it might be a little bit more than that? MR. DESPINS: Correct. THE COURT: But it doesn't have funds available in order to obtain this kind of financing out in the market?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 15 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
15 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. DESPINS:
It would be impossible for Genever |\n| 2 | US to pay this financing.
Because, one, you would have to |\n| 3 | be junior to the Sherry-Netherland, which we are, but risk |\n| 4 | of non-repayment would be very high under certain scenarios. |\n| 5 | So that the 9 percent interest rate charge here is really a |\n| 6 | bargain in a sense that there is no way that anyone would |\n| 7 | lend money on that basis given the risks involved.
And the |\n| 8 | risks are, to be perfectly blunt, how much of the apartment, |\n| 9 | you know, white boxed, would sell for?
And two, is there |\n| 10 | insurance coverage? |\n| 11 | And we believe there should be insurance coverage, |\n| 12 | but, you know, insurance litigation, there's always the |\n| 13 | risk. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Are you talking about the AIG |\n| 15 | insurance issue or? |\n| 16 | MR. DESPINS:
Correct.
Correct. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 18 | MR. DESPINS:
That's what I'm talking about. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 20 | MR. DESPINS:
So anybody coming from the outside |\n| 21 | would have to take that -- those risks that I just |\n| 22 | described, and I'm not sure anyone would do that. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
So you anticipate that the funds will |\n| 24 | be used to essentially clean up the fire damage, remediate |\n| 25 | asbestos, but nothing really more, so that the property |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 16 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 16 could be sold, excuse me, shown for sale and hopefully sold? That's the point of this loan? MR. DESPINS: That's correct, Your Honor. I mean, I know it's hard to believe, and we'll get to that next week I guess when we go through the renovation project, but the costs in New York City to do work on the apartment is crazy, but that's just the nature of the beast. Like architect work, which to my mind should be very simple, but of course I'm not an architect, you know, costs could cost \\$250,000. And why? Because you need to obtain all these permits from the various city departments. You need to -- you need to coordinate because this is a co- op. So for example, the walls are owned by the Sherry- Netherland, so the Sherry-Netherland is going to do some work jointly with us on this, but the coordination of that is huge, which is what the architect is going to do, and et cetera. So that's why the loan is \\$2 million. It's not only -- it's really not mostly to pay professional fees, but it's mostly to pay for this renovation project. THE COURT: Okay. I'm just looking to see if I have any more questions. If you just please give me one moment. Oh, I guess I did have one other question, which isn't, you know, I just didn't understand. The Sherry-\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 17 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 17 Netherland's first lien, and the security interest, and first lien on the cash deposit, those already exist, don't they? Those liens? MR. DESPINS: You mean the Sherry-Netherland liens? THE COURT: Yes. MR. DESPINS: Yes, they do exist. As part of any purchase of a co-op, apparently the co-op has a security interest in the shares. Those already exist. They've existed since the apartment was purchased. THE COURT: Right. So they're not getting any new liens under this DIP order? They're just acknowledging the existence of the liens and acknowledging that they're senior to this borrowing? MR. DESPINS: Correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: And one point. You just pointed out one of the concessions we made, or one of the agreements we made, to get the Sherry-Netherland on board with this. As Your Honor may know, under the lease with the Sherry-Netherland, there's a prohibition on giving security interest to anyone on the shares. And of course we are getting security interest on the shares. And of course we needed to have the Sherry-Netherland's non-objection to that as part of this agreement, so this was part of the give and\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 18 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
18 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | take that we entered (indiscernible). |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Understood. |\n| 3 | The Sherry-Netherland still has, Attorney Millman, |\n| 4 | you still, your client still has essentially, and I forget |\n| 5 | what the terminology is, I apologize, but what essentially |\n| 6 | is still a security deposit that you -- that was in place, |\n| 7 | at least we talked about some time ago, is that still -- |\n| 8 | there was about \\$3 million in an account.
What is the |\n| 9 | status of that account? |\n| 10 | MS. MILLMAN:
Your Honor, I just want to make sure |\n| 11 | first that you can hear me clearly now? |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Yes, I can.
Thank you.
I can.
Thank |\n| 13 | you very much. |\n| 14 | MS. MILLMAN:
Okay.
Good.
So there's |\n| 15 | approximately one million in the account at this point. |\n| 16 | As Your Honor knows, pursuant to an order of Judge |\n| 17 | Garrity, the Sherry-Netherland is allowed to apply the |\n| 18 | security deposit toward post-petition maintenance and |\n| 19 | regular assessments. |\n| 20 | Right now that usage was paused for that for now |\n| 21 | positionally on the basis that the apartment is arguably |\n| 22 | uninhabitable now.
And so for the last few months, really |\n| 23 | since March, but for a few costs that are not a part of the |\n| 24 | maintenance, there are other less-significant costs, but |\n| 25 | they're monthly costs, other than that, we've paused |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 19 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
19 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | applying the deposit or charging for post-petition |\n| 2 | maintenance, you know, until we hear from our insurance |\n| 3 | company. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
I see. |\n| 5 | MS. MILLMAN:
It's about a million dollars. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
That's helpful to |\n| 7 | know. |\n| 8 | All right.
Does anyone else wish to be heard with |\n| 9 | regard to the DIP financing motion? |\n| 10 | (No response) |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Trustee Despins, I'm looking at |\n| 12 | this order that was submitted yesterday, and I, you know, we |\n| 13 | found just one or two minor typos that we can correct. |\n| 14 | On the notice paragraph on what is, I don't know |\n| 15 | what page, I'm looking at the clean version, which is page 7 |\n| 16 | of 45 of the document that was filed yesterday, I'm looking |\n| 17 | specifically at page 3, oh, I actually should look at page |\n| 18 | 2, we have to add the hearing date on page 2 so that's ECF |\n| 19 | No. 2185, page 6 of 45.
At the second paragraph, there's an |\n| 20 | asterisk and a bracket, that's where we'll need to add the |\n| 21 | hearing date. |\n| 22 | And I can see the courtroom deputy nodding her |\n| 23 | head so she sees where I am. |\n| 24 | Okay.
On the next page, conclusions of law, |\n| 25 | paragraph A, third line, it says the individual debtor filed |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 20 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 20 with a voluntary petition, I think it was just filed a voluntary petition. I think with is an added word. MR. DESPINS: Yes. Yes. THE COURT: On page 8 of 45, lettered paragraph D, where it says notice, I would change that title to notice and service. And then on the second line of that paragraph D, proper, timely, adequate and sufficient notice and service of the motion and the DIP hearing. I'm looking to the courtroom deputy, if she's following what I'm saying. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: I think I missed that last -- THE COURT: Paragraph D. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yes. THE COURT: Second line where it's -- THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Oh. THE COURT: -- the sentence starts proper, timely, adequate and sufficient notice and service. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yes. Okay. THE COURT: And then in the next line toward the end of the third line, and no other -- no other or further notice or service. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Okay. THE COURT: Okay? THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yes.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 21 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 21 THE COURT: Then if we go to page 10 of 45, which -- in paragraph 1, where it says disposition, the relief requested in the motion is granted on a final basis as set forth herein. I know the language in the next sentence is standard, but I want it to be clear that no objections were filed, Trustee Despins, so I just would rather it read no objections to the motion have been filed, period. MR. DESPINS: Of course. THE COURT: Okay? MR. DESPINS: Yeah. THE COURT: And then I don't -- I do not have any further changes to the order. Attorney Claiborn, did you review the order? MS. CLAIBORN: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And you, the U.S. Trustee's -- MS. CLAIBORN: I have no other changes. THE COURT: The U.S. Trustee's Office has no further changes or objections to anything in the order? MS. CLAIBORN: That's correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to be heard with regard to the proposed order? (No response) THE COURT: Okay. Then for the reasons stated on the record, and due to the specific circumstances, facts and Case 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 22 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
22 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | circumstances of these Chapter 11 cases, the motion for a |\n| 2 | final debtor-in-possession order is granted, and the |\n| 3 | proposed order that appears at pages 5 through 21, but then |\n| 4 | we have to attach the DIP credit agreement as Exhibit 1, can |\n| 5 | enter with the minor changes noted on the record. |\n| 6 | Okay?
Thank you. |\n| 7 | Now we can move on to the applications for |\n| 8 | compensation. |\n| 9 | MR. DESPINS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | MR. DESPINS:
So the first one I guess we can deal |\n| 12 | with is the Paul Hastings application, and that's for the |\n| 13 | period from March 1st, 2023 to June 30th, 2023. |\n| 14 | We filed an extensive application with details, |\n| 15 | Your Honor.
And yesterday we filed a revised -- there were |\n| 16 | no objections that were filed -- we filed a revised proposed |\n| 17 | order to reflect the reduction that was agreed to with the |\n| 18 | U.S. Trustee.
And actually, that's just, you know, just to |\n| 19 | reflect that reduction. |\n| 20 | And on that point, Your Honor, I will note that I |\n| 21 | heard you loud and clear, because you probably said four |\n| 22 | times in the case, that we do -- that you do not expect, you |\n| 23 | know, these reductions to be ordinary course or something |\n| 24 | like that, but nevertheless we had extensive discussions |\n| 25 | with the U.S. Trustee and decided that it would be better |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 23 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 23 for the case generally, and to save Your Honor time, and to minimize fees, because we're talking about fees, to agree to that fee reduction. And I wanted you to understand that we are -- we had heard you loud and clear about this, but nevertheless it's that we decided that it was in the best interest of the case to agree to those fee reductions. So I believe that that is reflected in the order. Also, we were asked by counsel for Mr. -- actually, in this case, it's counsel for the debtor's daughter to provide that the carve out that's contained in the Lady May order, which is at ECF No. 1953, be incorporated in the order the way it was incorporated the last time around, and we did that, Your Honor. Obviously, I'm happy to entertain any questions you may have, but given the lack of objections, unless Your Honor has questions, I don't think I should, you know, go on. THE COURT: The only question I had is about the Lady May, is what you just described. I'm not sure I'm -- I don't recall what it is in that prior order that -- MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: -- that they're focusing on. MR. DESPINS: Yeah. This is paragraph 9 of the Lady May order that provides that if it turns out that they\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 24 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 24 actually own the Lady May, and of course there's an issue about, meaning that if Your Honor does a reversal on appeal not only of the Lady May ownership, but of the alter ego, then they would be entitled to seek disgorgement from the professionals, which is consistent with the practice in this district, which is to provide that there's a sentence that says subject to final adjustment and disgorgement in the event all admin claims are not paid in full. So that's the -- that's the paragraph. And you may remember, Your Honor, you spent a lot of time on that paragraph when we were going through it. And basically this allows them to seek disgorgement from the professionals to the extent it's finally determined that they own the Lady May. But, you know, that's -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: -- really the provision of the Lady May order. THE COURT: So you're saying that the added language as provided in the order approving the sale of the Lady May preserves their right to seek disgorgement if somehow -- if, it could obviously happen, if on appeal the order approving the sale is overturned is what you're saying? MR. DESPINS: Correct. THE COURT: Okay.\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 25 MR. DESPINS: Final order. It has to be by final order. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. All right. Attorney Claiborn, do you wish to be heard on the second interim fee application of Paul Hastings? MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you, Your Honor. I just want to confirm the understanding and the agreement to the reduction that's been memorialized in the U.S. Trustee's statement that's filed on the document at 2170. And that number matches the number in the revised order submitted by Trustee Despins. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I'm just looking at the revised order again. So Trustee Despins, am I correct that this will be the last, at least unless something changes, this is going to be the last fee application filed because we're going to be proceeding under the process of the procedures that were set up in the last month or so? MR. DESPINS: Well, there will be quarterly fee applications filed, but -- THE COURT: Right. I'm sorry. That didn't -- MR. DESPINS: -- under that -- THE COURT: I didn't ask the question well. I apologize. You're right. There will be quarterly fee -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 25 of 34\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 26 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 26 MR. DESPINS: No. But you're absolutely correct. This is the last of these types of applications unless something changes. THE COURT: Right. Okay. Good. I just want to make sure I'm understanding, and I believe I am. So you've just confirmed that, so that's fine. Does anyone else wish to be heard on the second interim fee application of Paul Hastings? (No response) THE COURT: Okay. Hearing no further comments, and I will state again for the record, no objections have been filed to the second interim fee application of Paul Hastings, which seeks an order approving compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the period of March 1st, 2023 through June 30, 2023, I've looked at the revised proposed order, which appears on pages 5 through 7 of ECF 2184, and Attorney Claiborn has confirmed that the dollar amounts in -- on page -- on the first page of the order, which is on page 5 of 2184, is the dollar amount that the United States Trustee's Office and Paul Hastings has agreed to as far as the fees to be awarded to the applicant, the only thing I'm going to do, ask the courtroom deputy to do, Trustee Despins, is in the first paragraph of the order it just says after notice and a hearing, just have the courtroom deputy, she already knows, notice and a hearing held on September\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 27 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
27 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | 12, 2023, just because you never know, sometimes that's very |\n| 2 | helpful believe it or not to people in the future to know |\n| 3 | that there was actually a hearing held, and with the many |\n| 4 | docket entries in this case, I think it is helpful, so |\n| 5 | otherwise, I have no other changes to the proposed order, |\n| 6 | and the interim application, the second interim application |\n| 7 | is granted and the proposed with the minor changes noted on |\n| 8 | the record will enter. |\n| 9 | MR. DESPINS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | And now we have the final fee application? |\n| 12 | MR. DESPINS:
Mr. Linsey. |\n| 13 | MR. LINSEY:
Yes, Your Honor.
That is the |\n| 14 | application of my firm, Neubert, Pepe and Monteith, as |\n| 15 | Connecticut counsel and conflict counsel for the Trustee, |\n| 16 | and as counsel, Connecticut counsel for the Genever debtors. |\n| 17 | The application seeks allowance of \\$357,587.50 in |\n| 18 | fees, \\$10,402.59 in expenses.
There's a certificate of |\n| 19 | service, which was filed at 2077 on the docket.
There are |\n| 20 | no objections.
The United States Trustee has filed a |\n| 21 | certificate of no objection, which is at 2169. |\n| 22 | The application itself speaks in considerable |\n| 23 | detail about the manners in which my firm has been involved |\n| 24 | in these proceedings.
And I'm happy to answer any questions |\n| 25 | Your Honor has. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 28 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 28 Absent that, I would just note that we filed a revised order in the same order that Paul Hastings did which is at 2186. THE COURT: 2186. Yeah. MR. LINSEY: Yes, 2186. And that adds the -- that adds the same language that Trustee Despins referred to referring to the Lady May sale order. And with that, we would ask that the application be granted. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to be heard on the second interim allowance of compensation and reimbursement of expenses of Neubert, Pepe and Monteith? (No response) THE COURT: Attorney Claiborn, as Attorney Linsey noted, you filed a statement of no -- the U. S. Trustee's Office filed a statement of no objection, correct? MS. CLAIBORN: That's correct, Your Honor. It's document no. 2169. And I don't have anything to add beyond that. THE COURT: Thank you. And I see, Attorney Linsey, the language you're referring to in the -- regarding the order approving the sale of the Lady May, adding that to your -- to this order to preserve the rights that were requested in connection with the Paul Hastings order in case there is a final order\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 29 of 34\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023
29 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | overturning the sale of the Lady May. |\n| 2 | The only change we'd need to make is just to add |\n| 3 | the hearing date in the first paragraph of the proposed |\n| 4 | order that appears on pages 5 and 6 of ECF 2186. |\n| 5 | So for all those reasons, the second interim |\n| 6 | application for compensation of Neubert, Pepe and Monteith |\n| 7 | is granted, and the proposed order will enter with the |\n| 8 | minor, with the very minor changes noted on the record. |\n| 9 | MR. LINSEY:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | All right.
That concludes all the matters on |\n| 12 | today's calendar, unless someone has something they have a |\n| 13 | question about. |\n| 14 | MR. DESPINS:
Yes, Your Honor.
If I may? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Go ahead. |\n| 16 | MR. DESPINS:
I'm really duty bound to inquire |\n| 17 | about the status of the criminal stay in our motion to stop |\n| 18 | that the -- Kwok and Yvette Wang from pursuing that criminal |\n| 19 | stay matter because we have a deadline coming up of |\n| 20 | September 21st in that case.
And obviously we would want to |\n| 21 | avoid that.
So I'm sorry.
I wanted to bring that up. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Well, there was an objection filed to |\n| 23 | your motion in this, in this court. |\n| 24 | At the same time, my understanding is that, and |\n| 25 | you can correct me if I'm wrong, that the district court in |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 30 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 30 the Southern District of New York criminal proceeding is allowing you, as the Trustee of the estates, to file some sort of repsonse, is that correct, to the motion -- MR. DESPINS: That's correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- to the motion to stay filed by Mr. Kwok's criminal counsel in the criminal proceedings, correct? MR. DESPINS: That's correct. THE COURT: Okay. So to -- so I'm going to wait to see what the district court does. This is -- this is not -- I don't know that the bankruptcy court has any authority, and I haven't been able to find any, that would allow a bankruptcy court to tell a party in a criminal proceeding that they can't seek some form of relief from the court in that criminal proceeding. I haven't seen any authority that would provide this court with the authority to do that. MR. DESPINS: Well, I -- I don't know if you've had a chance to look at the joinder filed by -- THE COURT: I did. I did. MR. DESPINS: -- the committee in PAX because I thought they cited a number of cases where -- THE COURT: They cited -- they cited one case which was helpful. I think the committee cited one case which held that the district court in the criminal\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 31 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 31 proceedings ruled on that motion, not the bankruptcy court. If I'm, Attorney Mayhew, if I'm saying something incorrect, please correct me, but my recollection of the review of the joinder was -- I understand the committee joins and they cited a case which was helpful, because I don't think there were any cases cited before that, but I think what that case said, well, my recollection of what that case said, is that the district court made that, in the criminal action made that determination, not the bankruptcy court, and I think that is an important distinction with a difference. I'm not sure that the bankruptcy court has authority, any authority, to enjoin anyone from doing anything in a criminal proceeding that is not part of the bankruptcy -- I don't know how a criminal proceeding could be part of the bankruptcy case. So I understand you may be frustrated. And I understand that, you know, you may feel that you would rather this court address the issue, and maybe I'll still have to address the issue after the district court rules, but I don't see -- I am not convinced or persuaded that there's any authority that exists that would authorize a bankruptcy court to stay a debtor who is no longer in possession, who is not only the subject of a criminal proceeding, but, in fact, incarcerated, from seeking relief\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 32 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 32 in that criminal proceeding. It doesn't mean he's going to obtain that relief, but I don't -- I don't see how the bankruptcy court has the authority to do that, any bankruptcy court. MR. DESPINS: Your Honor, it's because this is an attempt to control property of the estate. I mean, if this Chapter 11 case is stayed, the effect on property of the estate would be huge. You know. It's just I can't even conceive of it. We had a deadline, for example, the two-year statute of limitations is coming up in February. If this case is stayed, what's going to happen to all these important questions? THE COURT: Well, you're going to have to move to extend that statute of limitations, number one. Number two, the Mahwah mansion is not property of the estate at this time. That determination hasn't been made. MR. DESPINS: I know. No. But I want to be clear, they're seeking a stay of the entire Chapter 11 case. THE COURT: No. I understand. MR. DESPINS: Not only -- THE COURT: I read it. I understand. MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: I understand what they're seeking. MR. DESPINS: Okay.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 33 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 33 THE COURT: But the case that the committee cited, the district court did not grant that relief. MR. DESPINS: Understood. But I don't think there's any precedent. Your point is that there's no precedent where a bankruptcy court has enjoined such a proceeding. THE COURT: Correct. MR. DESPINS: I hear that. But I don't think there's any case where the relief was sought, except for that Boston District Court case, which sought in the district court, usually sought in the court where the case is pending. But I understand your -- understand your views and I appreciate the feedback, Your Honor. THE COURT: It may -- I have no idea what's going to occur, but I understand your request. And it doesn't mean that your request might not be addressed in some way, shape or form at some point, but I don't see any authority to have a bankruptcy court enjoin a criminal defendant from seeking relief in a criminal case. MR. DESPINS: Understood. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Is there anything further anyone would like to add to the record this afternoon?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 34 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok - September 12, 2023 34 (No response) THE COURT: Okay. That conclude the hearings in the Kwok and Genever-related Chapter 11 cases this afternoon. Those are the last matters on the calendar, so court is adjourned. Thank you, all. ALL COUNSEL: Thank you, Your Honor. (Proceedings concluded at 2:54 p.m.) I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above- entitled matter. 15 September 14, 2023 16 Christine Fiore, CERT","body_zh":"案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 1 页，共 34 页\n\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\n关于\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）及 GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever控股公司），\n布里奇波特，康涅狄格州\n2023年9月12日\n债务人。\n\n在尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）美国联邦破产法官面前进行的诉讼程序庭审记录\n\n出庭人员：\n\n第11章受托人：\nLUC A. DESPINS（吕克·A·德斯潘斯），律师\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n代表第11章受托人：\nG. ALEXANDER BONGARTZ（G·亚历山大·邦加茨），律师\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n诉讼程序由电子录音记录，庭审记录由速记服务机构制作。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与速记服务公司）\n4 Research Drive, Suite 402\nShelton, CT 06484\n(203)929-9992\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 2 页，共 34 页\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表第11章受托人：\nPATRICK R. LINSEY（帕特里克·R·林西），律师\nNeubert Pepe and Monteith（纽伯特、佩佩和蒙蒂斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street,13th Floor\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n代表美国受托人：\nHOLLEY L. CLAIBORN（霍莉·L·克莱伯恩），律师\nOffice of U.S. Trustee（美国受托人办公室）\nThe Giaimo Federal Building\n150 Court Street, Room 302\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n代表债权人委员会：\nKRISTEN B. MAYHEW（克里斯滕·B·梅休），律师\nPullman & Comley（普尔曼及康利律师事务所）\n850 Main Street\nBridgeport, CT 06601\n\n代表债权人 The Sherry-Netherland（雪莉-内瑟兰酒店）：\nSHERRY J. MILLMAN（雪莉·J·米尔曼），律师\nStroock & Stroock & Lavan（斯特鲁克、斯特鲁克及拉万律师事务所）\n180 Maiden Lane\nNew York, NY 10038\n\nTARUNA GARG（塔鲁娜·加格），律师\nMurtha Cullina, LLP（默萨·库利纳律师事务所）\n107 Elm Street, Suite 1101\nStamford, CT 06902\n\n代表 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，有限合伙企业）：\nANNECCA H. SMITH（安妮卡·H·史密斯），律师\nRobinson & Cole, LLP（罗宾逊及科尔律师事务所）\n280 Trumbull Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n#2051 Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）作为受托人律师的中期报酬申请，\n\n费用：$8,251,634.83，支出：$213,914.83\n\n#2053 NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙蒂斯专业公司）作为受托人律师的中期报酬申请（第二次中期），费用：$357,587.50，支出：$10,402.59\n\n#2110 第11章受托人及债务人 GENEVER US（Genever美国）和 GENEVER BVI（Genever英属维尔京群岛）共同提出的动议，请求作出终局命令：（I）授权第11章受托人依《破产法典》第363条提供融资；（II）授权 GENEVER US 和 GENEVER BVI 依《破产法典》第364条获得申请后融资；（III）授予不优先于既有担保权的留置权并提供超级优先行政费用债权；（IV）修改自动中止；及（V）授予相关救济\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 4 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日 4\n\n（诉讼程序于下午2:04开始。）\n\n法庭书记员：案件编号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n法庭：下午好。请先由第11章受托人开始，为记录说明出庭情况。你们认为没人能听见我们说话吗？我认为没人能听见我们说话。\n\n法庭书记员：嗯，这很奇怪，因为我们正在录音。我看不出有任何问题。\n\n法庭：我没有静音。\n\n法庭书记员：我也没有静音。\n\n法庭：有人能听见我们吗？\n\nDESPINS先生：是的，现在能听见了。\n\n法庭：哦，现在他能听见了。好的。那么，请法庭书记员再次宣读案件。\n\n法庭书记员：好的。案件编号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n法庭：下午好。请先由第11章受托人开始，为记录说明出庭情况。\n\nDESPINS先生：下午好，法官阁下。Luc Despins（吕克·德斯潘斯），第11章受托人。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nBONGARTZ先生：下午好，法官阁下。Alex\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日 5\n\nBongartz（亚历克斯·邦加茨），Paul Hastings（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）律师，代表第11章受托人。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nLINSEY先生：下午好，法官阁下。Patrick Linsey（帕特里克·林西），Neubert, Pepe and Monteith（纽伯特、佩佩和蒙蒂斯律师事务所）律师，受托人及其他债务人的代理律师，并且也代表有关（听不清）的费用申请。\n\n法庭：好的。请稍等片刻，因为你们的音频是通过电脑传来的，而不是通过扬声器。你们两位都听到这个问题了吗？听到了吗？\n\n法庭书记员：我听到他们的声音较低。\n\n法庭：是的。他们的声音不是通过扬声器传来的，而是通过电脑传来的。\n\n法庭书记员：不过我看不出有什么问题。我看不出可能是什么问题。等一下。让我问一下 Will（威尔）。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：好的。各位请稍等片刻，这也是我们举行现场听证会的原因之一。不过今天并非如此，所以请稍候。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：解决这个问题只需几分钟。因此，请各位稍候。谢谢。\n\n（暂停）\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 5 页，共 34 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 6 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日\n\n1 法庭：好的。那么现在各位都能听见我吗？\n\n2 好的。请某人说几句话，让我们确认声音是否通过正确的扬声器传出。\n\n4 Despins先生，请您说几句话。\n\n5 DESPINS先生：测试 123，测试。\n\n6 法庭：是这样吗？是的。好的。\n\n7 很好。现在我们可以适当地继续记录。抱歉。\n\n8 好的。因此，我们已经记录了 Despins先生和 Linsey先生的出庭情况，请继续。\n\n10 Bongartz先生，您要接着说吗？\n\n11 BONGARTZ先生：当然。这是 Alex Bongartz（亚历克斯·邦加茨）再次发言，\n\n12 来自 Paul Hastings（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所），代表第11章受托人。\n\n13 谢谢。\n\n14 法庭：下午好。\n\n15 CLAIBORN女士：下午好，法官阁下。Holley\n\n16 Claiborn（霍莉·克莱伯恩），代表美国受托人。\n\n17 法庭：下午好。\n\n18 MAYHEW女士：下午好，法官阁下。Kristen\n\n19 Mayhew（克里斯滕·梅休），Pullman & Comley（普尔曼及康利律师事务所）律师，代表无担保债权人正式委员会。\n\n21 法庭：下午好。\n\n22 MILLMAN女士：下午好，法官阁下。Sherry\n\n23 Millman（雪莉·米尔曼），Stroock & Stroock & Lavan（斯特鲁克、斯特鲁克及拉万律师事务所）律师，代表 The Sherry-Netherland（雪莉-内瑟兰酒店）。\n\n25 法庭：Millman律师，您再次发言时，如果您要发言，\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 7 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日 7\n\n请尽量靠近您的麦克风，因为刚才声音非常模糊。好吗？如您所知，即使我们有音频，如果声音模糊，速记员也无法记录。您不必重复刚才的话，但如果您还要说其他内容，请靠近您的麦克风，我将不胜感激。请继续，Garg律师。抱歉。\n\nGARG女士：下午好，法官阁下。没关系，法官阁下。下午好。Taruna Garg（塔鲁娜·加格），代表 The Sherry-Netherland（雪莉-内瑟兰酒店）。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nSMITH女士：下午好，法官阁下。Annecca Smith（安妮卡·史密斯），PAX（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金）的康涅狄格州律师。\n\n法庭：下午好。好的。感谢各位到场。昨天审阅日程表时，我们注意到日程表上的事项均设有异议截止日期，但未提交任何异议。正如 Despins受托人过去指出的，在某些时候，基于许多原因，可以举行远程听证会，其中一个原因是为了节省破产财产的时间和费用。由于今天日程表上的事项均无人提出异议，在该特定情形下，我决定今天远程举行这些听证会。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 8 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日\n\n1 现在，我认为前两项，即报酬申请，\n\n2 相当直接。我认为 DIP 动议相当直接，\n\n3 尽管可能需要为记录作出更多说明。\n\n5 因此，Despins受托人，您想先从报酬申请开始吗？\n\n7 DESPINS先生：由您决定，法官阁下。我原本\n\n8 打算从 DIP 开始，但我——但按您希望的方式进行。\n\n10 法庭：那您继续吧。那就先从 DIP 开始——\n\n12 DESPINS先生：好的。\n\n13 法庭：——也就是——\n\n14 DESPINS先生：好的。法官阁下，这是由 Kwok破产财产及两名 Genever债务人提交的 DIP 动议，\n\n15 是由 Kwok破产财产和两名 Genever债务人提交的，\n\n16 实质上是 Kwok破产财产向 Genever破产财产提供的一项救助贷款，\n\n17 旨在为 Genever债务人提供案件融资，坦率地说主要是为 Genever US，\n\n18 提供最高达 $2 million 的融资。\n\n19 我想就此提供一些背景情况。\n\n21 如法官阁下从先前听证会所知，Genever\n\n22 US 目前银行中可能仅剩约 20、$25,000。\n\n23 而 Genever BVI 没有现金。\n\n24 而且，由于保险公司尚未同意支付火灾造成的维修费用，当然\n\n25 该事项正在诉讼中，且诉讼尚待审理并将继续推进，但这将需要时间，而且，您知道，有些事情必须立即完成，以使这套公寓恢复到足以出售或出租的状态，尽管首要目标是出售，并且这必须现在就发生。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 9 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日 9\n\n从某种意义上说，这项动议本应得到审理，未能将其与翻修项目动议同时安排审理，是我的责任，但它们在某种意义上是相关的，因为大部分资金将用于该公寓的翻修项目。该公寓所谓“白盒化”工程的成本，意味着清理该公寓约 20 percent 区域中火灾造成的全部损害，并将其白盒化，不是将其恢复原状，而是实际铺设白色石膏板，并恢复所有管道、给排水、电力等连接。听起来似乎相当简单，但实际上并非如此，例如，是否需要建筑师来完成该工作？是否需要建筑师监督必须进行的各项程序？发现了需要修复的石棉。当然，该动议并不在法庭审理范围内，但我希望您理解该项目的规模，\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 10 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年9月12日 10\n\n以及我们为何考虑提供 $2 million 的贷款，实质上只是为了资助该案件的该部分。还不止于此，也就是说，是的，将会有 Genever聘请的律师为推进 AIG 诉讼等事项提供服务所产生的专业费用，但 $2 million 贷款的大部分将用于翻修项目。其不能等待的原因在于，这就像俄罗斯套娃。您知道，基本上，您需要先从最小的一个开始，然后再逐渐增加、增加、增加。因此，我们必须立即着手需要完成的基础工作，取得许可证等，否则一年就会过去，而我们将一事无成。当然，我们不能这样做。因此，我们现在需要资金来资助该翻修项目。为明确起见，正如我们在动议中所述，Kwok破产财产没有义务这样做。Kwok破产财产这样做，是因为其希望保留从该公寓获得收益的可能性。当然，如果其不出借该笔资金，那么最终将成为一项完全清算，届时可能不会有任何资金上缴至 Kwok破产财产层面。因此，从这一角度看，Kwok破产财产提供该笔贷款以保留该可能性是合理的。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 11 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023 11 但这并非无风险贷款。在某些情况下，法官阁下，该贷款可能无法偿还。我认为这些情况不会发生，但这当然是一种可能性。我已经向法官阁下解释了原因。法官阁下，我将非常坦率地说，这笔贷款是单方面的。您知道，其中有些条款是您绝不会在商业贷款人提供的贷款中见到的。例如，其中规定，贷款人可自行决定提供资金，这意味着由我作为受托人自行决定，因此这并非一笔独立交易原则下的贷款，但这是因为该贷款是本着其预定目的而进行的。这并非为了巩固 Genever US（Genever US）债权人的回收额。这是为了可能保全股权价值，因此，这是一份单方面文件。因此，第一部分是，贷款由我自行决定发放。款项可以直接支付给供应商。因此，例如，我不必将款项汇入 Genever US 账户以支付建筑师费用。可以直接向建筑师付款，即使 Genever US 实际上并未接触该款项，该款项也将构成贷款。法官阁下，其中有此类条款。但如我所言，这并非无风险贷款，因此我们需要有这些条款。此外，法官阁下，我们已经与 Sherry-Netherland（谢里-内瑟兰）就这笔贷款及其权利进行了广泛谈判，因为 Sherry-Netherland——显然，我们——该公寓位于 Sherry-Netherland，但 Sherry-Netherland 是有担保债权人。他们对股份和租约项下权利享有质押权，我们已同意他们的受偿顺位优先于我们的贷款。我们也同意向其作出其他让步。但我要说，Sherry-Netherland 至今与我们的关系极具建设性，这在某种程度上有违直觉，因为我相信那里很多人对发生的事情非常不满，但他们一直给予了极大的帮助。正如您可以想见，如果没有他们的合作，要进行翻修项目及其他所有工作将极其困难，因为在纽约有许多程序必须完成。这是一栋工会大楼，诸如此类。因此，关键是，Sherry-Netherland 至今一直非常支持，我希望这种情况能够持续。但作为 DIP 贷款的一部分，我们已与其达成若干安排协议，这些协议反映在 DIP 命令中，我想向法官阁下提及这一点。法官阁下，我们已提交关于最终 DIP 的拟议修订命令，即修订后的修订命令，载于案卷编号 2185。我相信我们是在昨天提交的。而且——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 12 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023 12 变更，我只是查看一下显示变更的版本，这些变更相当小，且主要是应 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）的要求作出的。此前有一项规定。我之前提到，我们与 Sherry-Netherland 达成了一些让步或协议，这部分见于案卷 2185 的第 39 页（共 45 页），即显示变更的版本，但您会看到第 12 段规定，我们有权支付 Sherry-Netherland 的破产申请后费用，也就是 Sherry-Netherland 的律师费用。美国受托人要求，而我们同意，Sherry-Netherland 也同意，在作出这些付款前，Genever US 将向本院提交通知，并附上相关发票。将留出一段时间供他人提出异议。如提出异议，将举行听证会。这样，如果有人不同意将作出的付款，就有程序让其陈述意见。顺便说一句，这仅赋予我们作出这些付款的权限，并不指示我们或使我们负有作出这些付款的义务。但无论如何，现在有一项内置规定，允许人们对该拟议付款提出异议，这确实是相对于先前版本的命令所反映的变更，而现在——修订该命令的命令是文件 2185，法官阁下。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 13 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023 14 法庭：在命令条款的第 12 段中，您现在谈的就是这个，对吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：在显示变更的版本中，是第 39 页（共 45 页），第 12 段，即支付某些邮资和费用的权限。\n\n法庭：是的，我看到了。\n\nDESPINS 先生：因此，法官阁下，除非您有问题，我认为这将完成初步陈述。\n\n法庭：我有几个我认为是小问题。因此，我想我听到您说，而且我相信我是这样理解的，但如果我错了，请您纠正我，这笔钱是借给 Genever USA——US 的，但实质上您将从 Kwok（郭文贵）财产中支付所有这些费用？\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法庭：好的。目前 Genever USA 的运营账户中只有 $20,000，或者大约——我不该这么说——接近 $20,000 的金额，可能略高于该数额？\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n\n法庭：但它没有可用资金，无法在市场上取得此类融资？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 14 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023\n\nDESPINS 先生：Genever US 不可能支付这笔融资。因为，第一，您必须在 Sherry-Netherland 的受偿顺位之后，而我们正是如此；但在某些情形下，无法偿还的风险将非常高。因此，这里的 9 percent 利率，从某种意义上说确实是很优惠的，因为鉴于所涉风险，没有人会以该等条件出借资金。风险在于，坦率地说，完成白盒式整修后的公寓能卖多少钱？第二，是否有保险赔付？\n\n我们认为应当有保险赔付，但您知道，保险诉讼总是存在风险。\n\n法庭：您是在谈 AIG（AIG）保险问题，还是？\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。正确。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：我谈的就是这个。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：因此，任何外部人士都必须承担我刚才描述的那些风险，我不确定会有人这样做。\n\n法庭：所以您预计，这些资金实质上将用于清理火灾损害、治理石棉，但实际上不会用于更多事项，以便该房产能够出售，抱歉，能够展示出售并希望售出？这就是这笔贷款的目的？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 15 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023 16 DESPINS 先生：正确，法官阁下。我的意思是，我知道这很难令人相信，我想下周我们审议翻修项目时会谈到这一点，但在纽约市对公寓进行施工的成本高得惊人，但这就是现实。例如，建筑师工作，在我看来本应很简单，但当然我不是建筑师，您知道，费用可能达到 $250,000。为什么？因为您需要从各个市政府部门取得所有这些许可。您需要——您需要协调，因为这是合作公寓。因此，例如，墙体属于 Sherry-Netherland，因此 Sherry-Netherland 将就此与我们共同进行部分工作，但协调工作量很大，这正是建筑师要做的工作，诸如此类。因此，这就是贷款额为 $2 million 的原因。这不仅仅是——实际上主要并不是支付专业费用，而是主要用于支付该翻修项目。\n\n法庭：好的。我只是看看我是否还有其他问题。请给我一点时间。哦，我想我确实还有一个问题，这不是，您知道，我只是没有理解。Sherry-Netherland 的第一留置权、担保权益以及对现金保证金的第一留置权，这些已经存在，不是吗？这些留置权？\n\nDESPINS 先生：您的意思是 Sherry-Netherland 的留置权？\n\n法庭：是。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是，它们确实存在。显然，作为购买合作公寓的一部分，合作公寓对股份享有担保权益。这些权益已经存在。自购买该公寓以来，它们就一直存在。\n\n法庭：对。因此，他们不会根据这项 DIP 命令获得任何新的留置权？这只是确认这些留置权的存在，并确认它们的受偿顺位优先于这笔借款？\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：还有一点。您刚才指出了我们为使 Sherry-Netherland 同意此事所作的一项让步，或我们达成的一项协议。正如法官阁下可能知道，根据与 Sherry-Netherland 签订的租约，禁止将股份的担保权益授予任何人。当然，我们正在取得股份的担保权益。当然，作为本协议的一部分，我们需要取得 Sherry-Netherland 对此不提出异议的同意，因此，这是我们达成的互相让步的一部分——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 16 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- September 12, 2023\n\n法庭：明白。Sherry-Netherland 仍然拥有，Millman 律师，您仍然，您的客户实质上仍然拥有——我忘了术语是什么，抱歉——但实质上仍然是您——当时已有的一笔保证金，至少我们之前谈过，是这样吗？一个账户里大约有 $3 million。该账户目前的状况如何？\n\nMILLMAN 女士：法官阁下，我想先确认，您现在能清楚听到我说话吗？\n\n法庭：是的，我能。谢谢。我能听到。非常感谢。\n\nMILLMAN 女士：好的。很好。因此，该账户目前约有 one million。正如法官阁下所知，根据 Garrity 法官的命令，Sherry-Netherland 获准将该保证金用于支付破产申请后的维护费和常规摊派费用。\n\n目前，就该用途而言，暂时中止，因为立场是该公寓目前可被认为不适合居住。因此，过去几个月，实际上自 March 以来，除少数不属于维护费的费用外，还有其他较不重要但属于每月发生的费用，除此以外，我们已暂停——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2202 Filed 09/15/23 Entered 09/15/23 08:56:44 Page 19 of 34\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023\n\n1 适用该押金或收取破产申请后\n\n2 的维护费用，您知道的，直至我们收到保险\n\n3 公司的消息。\n\n4 法庭：\n\n我明白。\n\n5 MILLMAN 女士（米尔曼）：\n\n大约为一百万美元。\n\n6 法庭：\n\n好的。\n\n谢谢。这有助于\n\n7 了解情况。\n\n8 好的。还有其他人希望就\n\n9 债务人自行管理融资动议发言吗？\n\n10 （无人回应）\n\n11 法庭：\n\n好的。Despins（德斯平斯）受托人，我正在看\n\n12 昨天提交的这份命令，而且，您知道，我们\n\n13 发现了一两个可以更正的小错别字。\n\n14 关于通知的段落，在第几页，我不清楚；\n\n15 我正在看清洁版，即昨天提交文件的第 7\n\n16 页，共 45 页；我具体在看第 3 页，哦，实际上我应该看第\n\n17 2 页；我们必须在第 2 页添加听证日期，因此这是 ECF\n\n18 No. 2185，第 6 页，共 45 页。在第二段，有一个\n\n19 星号和一个方括号；我们需要在该处添加\n\n20 听证日期。\n\n21 我看到法庭书记员正在点头，\n\n22 因此她知道我说的是哪里。\n\n23 好的。在下一页，“法律结论”，\n\n24 A 段第三行，其中写道个人债务人提交了\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 20 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 20 自愿申请书，我认为应当只是“提交了自愿申请书”。我认为“with”是多加的一个词。\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n是。是。\n\n法庭：\n\n在第 8 页，共 45 页，字母标示的 D 段中，写有“notice”的地方，我会将该标题改为“notice and service”。然后，在 D 段第二行，“对该动议和 DIP 听证会作出了适当、及时、充分且足够的通知和送达”。我看向法庭书记员，确认她是否跟得上我所说的内容。\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n我想我漏掉了最后一处——\n\n法庭：\n\nD 段。\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n是。\n\n法庭：\n\n第二行，在那里——\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n哦。\n\n法庭：\n\n——该句以“适当、及时、充分且足够的通知和送达”开始。\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n是。好的。\n\n法庭：\n\n然后在下一行、第三行接近末尾之处，“且无需作出其他——无需作出其他或进一步的通知或送达”。\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n好的。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的？\n\n法庭书记员：\n\n是。\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 21 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 21\n\n法庭：\n\n然后，如果我们看第 10 页，共 45 页，即第 1 段，其中写有“处置”，该动议所请求的救济按本命令所载予以最终批准。我知道下一句中的措辞是标准措辞，但我希望明确未提交任何异议，Despins 受托人，所以我宁愿其表述为“未对该动议提交任何异议。”句号。\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n当然。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的？\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n是。\n\n法庭：\n\n然后我没有——我对该命令没有任何进一步修改。Claiborn（克莱伯恩）律师，您审阅过该命令吗？\n\nCLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n\n是，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n您，以及美国受托人——\n\nCLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n\n我没有其他修改意见。\n\n法庭：\n\n美国受托人办公室对该命令中的任何内容均无进一步修改意见或异议？\n\nCLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n\n正确，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢。还有其他人希望就拟议命令发言吗？\n\n（无人回应）\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。那么，基于庭审记录中所述理由，并鉴于这些 Chapter 11 案件的具体情形、事实及\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 22 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023\n\n1 情况，关于最终债务人自行管理命令的动议\n\n2 获准，且出现在第 5 页至第 21 页的\n\n3 拟议命令，但我们必须将 DIP 信贷协议作为附件 1\n\n4 附上，可按照庭审记录中指出的轻微修改\n\n5 予以录入。\n\n6 好的？谢谢。\n\n7 现在我们可以继续审理\n\n8 报酬申请。\n\n9 DESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：\n\n谢谢。\n\n11 DESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n那么，我想我们可以先处理\n\n12 Paul Hastings（保罗·黑斯廷斯）的申请，该申请涉及\n\n13 2023 年 3 月 1 日至 2023 年 6 月 30 日期间。\n\n14 我们提交了一份内容详尽的申请，其中载有详细说明，\n\n15 法官阁下。昨天我们提交了修订版——没有人提交\n\n16 异议——我们提交了修订后的拟议\n\n17 命令，以反映与美国受托人商定的减额。\n\n18 实际上，那只是，您知道的，只是为了\n\n19 反映该减额。\n\n20 关于这一点，法官阁下，我要指出，我\n\n21 清楚地听到了您的意见，因为您可能在本案中说了四\n\n22 次，我们确实——您不希望，您知道，\n\n23 这些减额成为正常业务惯例或类似情形，\n\n24 但尽管如此，我们与美国受托人进行了广泛讨论，\n\n25 并认为这样做对本案整体而言会更好，\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 23 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 23 且可以节省法官阁下的时间，并将费用降至最低，因为我们谈论的是费用，同意该费用减额。我希望您理解，我们——我们已清楚地听到了您就此发表的意见，但尽管如此，我们还是认定，同意这些费用减额符合本案的最佳利益。因此，我相信该命令已反映了这一点。此外，Mr.——实际上在本案中，是债务人女儿的律师要求我们规定，将 Lady May（“梅夫人”号）命令中载明的 carve out 条款，该命令见 ECF No. 1953，以与上次相同的方式纳入该命令；我们已经这样做了，法官阁下。显然，我乐意回答您可能提出的任何问题，但鉴于没有异议，除非法官阁下有问题，我认为我不应当，您知道的，继续说下去。\n\n法庭：\n\n我唯一的问题是关于 Lady May，即您刚才所述的内容。我不确定我——我不记得此前命令中他们所关注的内容是什么——\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n是。\n\n法庭：\n\n——是什么。\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n是。这是 Lady May 命令第 9 段，该段规定，如果最终证明他们\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 24 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 24 实际拥有 Lady May，当然，这存在一个问题，即如果法官阁下在上诉中不仅撤销关于 Lady May 所有权的裁定，而且撤销关于另我实体的裁定，那么他们将有权向专业人士寻求返还，这与本区的惯例一致，即规定有一句话称，如所有行政债权未获全额支付，则应进行最终调整和返还。因此，这就是——这就是该段。您可能记得，法官阁下，当我们审阅该段时，您在该段上花了很多时间。基本上，这使他们能够在最终认定其拥有 Lady May 的范围内向专业人士寻求返还。但是，您知道，这——\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n——确实就是 Lady May 命令的规定。\n\n法庭：\n\n所以您是说，如 Lady May 出售批准命令所规定的，新增措辞保留了他们在某种情况下——如果，显然可能发生，如果上诉中出售批准命令被推翻——寻求返还的权利，是这个意思吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n正确。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 25\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n最终命令。必须是最终命令。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。好的。好吧。Claiborn 律师，您希望就 Paul Hastings 的第二次临时费用申请发言吗？\n\nCLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n\n谢谢，法官阁下。我只是想确认，已在美国受托人提交于文件 2170 中的声明中予以记载的、关于减额的理解和协议。该金额与 Despins 受托人提交的修订命令中的金额一致。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢。我再看一下修订命令。那么，Despins 受托人，我的理解是否正确：这将是最后一份费用申请，至少除非情况发生变化，因为我们将按照过去一个月左右制定的程序流程继续进行？\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n嗯，将会提交季度费用申请，但——\n\n法庭：\n\n对。我很抱歉。那没有——\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n——依照该程序——\n\n法庭：\n\n我没有把问题问好。抱歉。您说得对。将会有季度费用——\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 25 页，共 34 页\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 26 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023 26\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n不是。但您完全正确。这是此类申请中的最后一份，除非情况发生变化。\n\n法庭：\n\n对。好的。很好。我只是想确保我的理解正确，而且我相信确实如此。您刚才已经确认了，所以没问题。还有其他人希望就 Paul Hastings 的第二次临时费用申请发言吗？\n\n（无人回应）\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。既然没有进一步意见，我再次为记录声明，未对 Paul Hastings 的第二次临时费用申请提交任何异议；该申请请求一项命令，批准 2023 年 3 月 1 日至 2023 年 6 月 30 日期间的报酬及费用偿还。我已审阅修订后的拟议命令，该命令见 ECF 2184 第 5 页至第 7 页；Claiborn 律师已确认，命令第一页中的金额，即 2184 第 5 页中的金额，是美国受托人办公室与 Paul Hastings 就应授予申请人的费用所达成一致的金额。我唯一要做的，是请法庭书记员做一件事，Despins 受托人，即在命令第一段中，其仅写道“经通知和听证后”，请让法庭书记员——她已经知道——写明“经通知及于 September\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 27 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— September 12, 2023\n\n1 12, 2023 举行的听证后”，只是因为您永远不知道，\n\n2 无论是否相信，这有时对将来的人了解\n\n3 确实举行过听证会非常有帮助；鉴于本案有众多\n\n4 案卷记录条目，我认为这很有帮助。因此，除此之外，\n\n5 我对拟议命令没有其他修改；该临时申请，即第二次临时申请，\n\n6 获准，且载有庭审记录中所指出的轻微修改的拟议命令\n\n7 将予以录入。\n\n8 \n\n9 DESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：\n\n谢谢。\n\n11 现在我们有最终费用申请？\n\n12 DESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：\n\nLinsey（林赛）先生。\n\n13 LINSEY 先生（林赛）：\n\n是，法官阁下。这是\n\n14 我的律所 Neubert, Pepe and Monteith（诺伊贝特、佩佩及蒙蒂斯），作为\n\n15 受托人的康涅狄格州律师及利益冲突律师，\n\n16 以及作为 Genever（吉尼弗）债务人的康涅狄格州律师所提交的申请。\n\n17 该申请请求批准 $357,587.50 的\n\n18 费用及 $10,402.59 的开支。案卷中已提交送达证明，\n\n19 编号为 2077。没有\n\n20 异议。美国受托人已提交无异议证明，\n\n21 编号为 2169。\n\n22 该申请本身相当详细地说明了\n\n23 我的律所参与本程序的方式。\n\n24 我乐意回答法官阁下可能提出的任何问题。\n\nCase 22-50073 文书 2202 已提交 09/15/23 已录入 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 28 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 28 除此之外，我仅想指出，我们提交了一份修订后的裁定，与 Paul Hastings（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）所提交的同一份裁定，编号为 2186。法庭：2186。是的。LINSEY 律师：是的，2186。该裁定增加了 Despins 受托人所提及的、关于 Lady May（“Lady May”号）出售裁定的相同措辞。基于此，我们请求准许该申请。法庭：好的。谢谢。是否还有其他人希望就 Neubert, Pepe and Monteith（诺伊贝特、佩佩和蒙泰斯）的第二次临时补偿及费用偿还申请发表意见？（无人回应）法庭：Claiborn 律师，如 Linsey 律师所述，您提交了一份无异议声明——U. S. Trustee's Office（美国受托人办公室）提交了一份无异议声明，对吗？CLAIBORN 女士：是的，法官大人。文件编号为 2169。除此之外，我没有任何补充。法庭：谢谢。Linsey 律师，我看到您所指的是——关于批准出售 Lady May 的裁定，在您——在本裁定中加入该措辞，以保留与 Paul Hastings 裁定相关而请求保留的权利，以防存在一项最终裁定\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 29 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日\n1 推翻 Lady May 的出售。\n2 我们唯一需要作出的修改，是在拟议\n3 裁定的第一段中加入听证日期，\n4 该拟议裁定载于 ECF 2186 的第 5 和第 6 页。\n5 因此，基于上述所有理由，Neubert, Pepe and Monteith\n6 的第二次临时补偿申请\n7 获准，拟议裁定将以所述\n8 轻微、极其轻微的记录在案修改后录入。\n9 LINSEY 律师：\n谢谢您，法官大人。\n10 法庭：\n谢谢。\n11 好的。\n至此，今日日程上的所有事项\n12 均已处理完毕，除非有人有问题\n13 要提出。\n14 DESPINS 律师：\n是的，法官大人。如果可以的话？\n15 法庭：\n可以。请讲。\n16 DESPINS 律师：\n我确有职责询问\n17 我们请求阻止\n18 Kwok（郭）和 Yvette Wang（王雁）推进该刑事\n19 中止事项的动议中，刑事中止的状态，因为该案中\n20 我们即将面临 9月21日 的截止日期。显然，我们希望\n21 避免这种情况。因此抱歉。我想提出这一点。\n22 法庭：\n对于您在本——本法庭提出的动议，\n23 已有一份异议被提交。\n24 同时，据我了解，\n25 若我有误，您可以纠正我，纽约南区\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 30 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 30 的 Southern District of New York（纽约南区）刑事程序允许您作为各财产的受托人提交某种回应，对吗，针对该动议——DESPINS 律师：是的，法官大人。法庭：——针对 Kwok 先生的刑事辩护律师在刑事程序中提交的中止动议，对吗？DESPINS 律师：是的。法庭：好的。因此——因此，我将等待看看地区法院如何处理。这——这并非——我不知道破产法院是否有任何权限，而且我尚未能找到任何依据，允许破产法院告知刑事程序中的一方，其不得向该刑事程序中的法院寻求某种形式的救济。我没有看到任何会赋予本法庭该等权限的依据。DESPINS 律师：嗯，我——我不知道您是否有机会审阅由——法庭：我审阅了。我审阅了。DESPINS 律师：——PAX 中的委员会提交的加入书，因为我认为他们引用了若干案件，其中——法庭：他们引用了——他们引用了一起有帮助的案件。我认为委员会引用了一起案件，该案认为刑事\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 31 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 31 程序中的地区法院对该动议作出了裁决，而非破产法院。如果我说得不正确，Mayhew 律师，请纠正我，但我对该加入书审阅的记忆是——我理解委员会加入，并且他们引用了一起有帮助的案件，因为我认为此前没有引用任何案件，但我认为该案件所说的是，嗯，我对该案件所说内容的记忆是，地区法院在刑事诉讼中作出了该项决定，而非破产法院，我认为这是一个具有差异的重要区别。我不确定破产法院是否有权限，任何权限，禁止任何人在并非破产程序一部分的刑事程序中从事任何行为——我不知道刑事程序如何能够成为破产案件的一部分。因此，我理解您可能感到沮丧。我也理解，您知道，您可能认为宁愿由本法庭处理该问题，也许在地区法院作出裁决后，我仍须处理该问题，但我看不出——我并不确信或相信存在任何依据，可授权破产法院中止一名已不再占有财产的债务人、其不仅是刑事程序的对象，而且事实上已被监禁，寻求\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 32 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 32 在该刑事程序中获得救济。这并不意味着他会获得该救济，但我——我看不出破产法院如何有权限这样做，任何破产法院都没有。DESPINS 律师：法官大人，这是因为这是一项试图控制破产财产的行为。我的意思是，如果本 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件被中止，对破产财产的影响将会极大。您知道。这实在是我无法想象的。举例而言，我们有一个截止期限，两年的诉讼时效将于二月届满。如果本案被中止，所有这些重要问题将会如何处理？法庭：嗯，第一，您将不得不申请延长该诉讼时效。第二，Mahwah mansion（马瓦豪宅）目前不是破产财产。该认定尚未作出。DESPINS 律师：我知道。不是。但我想澄清，他们寻求中止整个 Chapter 11 案件。法庭：不，我理解。DESPINS 律师：不仅仅是——法庭：我读过了。我理解。DESPINS 律师：好的。法庭：我理解他们所寻求的内容。DESPINS 律师：好的。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 33 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 33 法庭：但委员会所引用的案件中，地区法院并未准许该救济。DESPINS 律师：明白。但我认为不存在任何先例。您的观点是，并无破产法院禁令禁止此类程序的先例。法庭：正确。DESPINS 律师：我明白这一点。但我认为，除该波士顿地区法院案件外，并无其他案件曾寻求该救济；该案是在地区法院寻求救济，通常是在案件待决的法院寻求救济。但我理解您的——理解您的观点，并感谢您的反馈，法官大人。法庭：可能——我不知道将会发生什么，但我理解您的请求。这并不意味着您的请求在某个时点不会以某种方式得到处理，但我看不出有任何依据可让破产法院禁止一名刑事被告在刑事案件中寻求救济。DESPINS 律师：明白。法庭：谢谢。DESPINS 律师：谢谢您，法官大人。法庭：今天下午还有任何人希望补充记录吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2202 提交于 09/15/23 录入于 09/15/23 08:56:44 第 34 页，共 34 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年9月12日 34 （无人回应）法庭：好的。至此，今日下午 Kwok（郭）及 Genever（吉尼弗）相关 Chapter 11 案件的听证结束。这些是日程上的最后事项，因此现在休庭。谢谢各位。全体律师：谢谢您，法官大人。（程序于下午 2:54 结束。）本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯廷·菲奥雷），经法院批准的文字记录员及经认证的电子记录员和文字记录员，证明上述内容系对上述所列事项程序的官方电子录音所作的正确文字记录。15 2023年9月14日 16 Christine Fiore（克里斯廷·菲奥雷），CERT","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Paul Hastings","Luc Despins","CIPA"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1953,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2184,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2185,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2186,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":8154,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-09-15 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-09-15","updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:16:16"}