Published: August 13, 2008 12:00 am            

Trustee re-appointed to Terrill case

Attorney sought to have representative's bankruptcy case reopened

OKLAHOMA CITY — OKLAHOMA CITY — The Edmond attorney who asked the U.S. Federal Bankruptcy Court to reopen state Rep. Randy Terrill’s two-year-old Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing has been reappointed as the creditor’s trustee in the case.

Documents filed Tuesday with the Western Oklahoma District Bankruptcy Court show that John D. Mashburn — the original creditor’s trustee in the case — was reappointed to the position.

“John Mashburn, panel trustee in the Western District of Oklahoma, is hereby appointed interim trustee of the estate…” U.S. bankruptcy trustees Richard Wieland and Herbert M. Graves wrote in a Notice of Trustee Selection and Appointment.

Earlier this summer, Mashburn filed a request to reopen Rep. Terrill’s bankruptcy filing after published reports surfaced in an Oklahoma City Hispanic newspaper alleging irregularities between Terrill’s bankruptcy petition and his state campaign filings.

In that motion, Mashburn said state campaign reports showed Terrill had received funds from his campaign, which could be considered an asset in his bankruptcy.

Those funds were not listed on Terrill’s bankruptcy filing.

“The purpose of this reopening, as far as I’m concerned, is to try and recover assets, or what appears to be assets, of the estate,” Mashburn told The Transcript last week. “The trustee already has information to pursue an asset. If he needs more information, he can request information either formally or informally.”

Last week, Oklahoma City attorney Jeffrey West filed a request asking the court to deny Mashburn’s motion.

“Wherefore, debtor respectfully requests that your honorable court deny the motion to reopen the bankruptcy filed by the trustee and if needed set this matter for a hearing and order such other and further relief as is just and proper,” West wrote.

In their motion, West said Terrill had not received a “loan repayment” from his campaign, despite its being listed as a loan on campaign filings.

“…That payment was for a re-imbursement for expenditures that the debtor incurred during his normal course of business in operating his campaign,” West wrote. “…These are not ‘loans’ in the traditional sense of the word and are monies the debtor put into his campaign for operation and payment of expenditures. At no time was money ever exchanged or received by the debtors in regard to these ‘loans.’”

On Aug. 7, Terrill said neither he nor his wife had objections to the case being reopened adding the couple “had filed no objections to the trustee’s request.”

“We don’t have any problem with the court taking a second look,” Terrill said earlier this month. “We don’t object at all to the court taking a second look to make sure everything was done properly. Neither my wife, nor I filed objections to the trustee’s request and we did not contest the court’s action. We have no problem with them taking a second look at a personal, private financial matter.”

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.