This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
Case 25-23251-MEH Doc 50 Filed 01/07/26 Entered 01/07/26 15:54:27 Desc Main
Document Page 7 of 12
In re Seaview Apartments LLC
Case No. 25-23251 (MEH)
FourLeaf under which FourLeaf will transfer to those tenants a multi-million-dollar deficiency
claim against Mr. Weinstein. The bona fides of the sale transaction, including the Receiver’s
marketing efforts to sell the Property, the fairness of the price, and the resulting settlement between
and among FourLeaf and the former tenants, were presented to, argued before, and thereafter
approved by the Circuit Court on December 3, 2025. (See generally Hr’g Tr. Doc. No. 36; Order
Approving Sale, Ex. J to FourLeaf’s Br., Doc. No. 18-11).
The Debtor filed the present bankruptcy case less than two weeks later, on December 15,
2025, complaining of perceived mismanagement by the Receiver in inadequately marketing the
Property for sale, in allegedly self-dealing by using a particular broker affiliated with the Receiver
did, and ultimately failing to acquire the best sale price. (See Goldwasser Decl., Doc. No. 10;
Debtor’s Opp’n Br. ¶¶ 24-28, Doc. No. 44). Through its bankruptcy case, the Debtor seeks “to
cleanse the sales process by implementing a fair, open, and truly competitive process under this
Court’s supervision.” (Debtor’s Opp’n Br. ¶ 26, Doc. No. 44). In other words, the Debtor,
unsatisfied with the results in the Circuit Court, and faced with the impending January 8 deadline
of the Property’s sale closing and resolution of the tenants’ settlement, seeks a redo, requesting
that this Court in effect unwind the Circuit Court’s order approving the sale.
The Court, however, cannot countenance the use of the bankruptcy process in this manner
when the evidence presented overwhelmingly demonstrates that the Debtor’s purpose for filing its
petition is unsubstantiated, at best, and manufactured, at worst, and is little more than a litigation
tactic to stall the Property’s closing and potentially protect Mr. Weinstein from personal liability.
As FourLeaf’s motion aptly argues, and as the Receiver’s counsel also asserted at oral argument,
the driving force behind the Debtor’s bankruptcy filing cannot, in fact, be about the sale process
Page 7 of 12Jump to an indexed page (12 of 12)