A reader asked the following question, “The receiver in the Hess Kennedy case paid their attorneys over $68,000 and paid himself over $38,000. How come Daniel Stermer is still earning $38k per month?”
They provided a link to this file.
I took a look at the file and here is a summary of what I did find.
Inventory On August 5, 2008, the Receiver tiled an initial inventory report in this Action. Since that date, no additional property or effects have been discovered or come to the Receiver’s hands except as set forth in this or prior Reports. The Receiver has continued to facilitate the sale of certain personal property of the Receivership Estates, including desktop computers and related computer equipment. The net proceeds of these sales to date through May 31, 2012, have been $l4,798.00, which have been deposited into the operating accounts of the Receivership Entities.
The remaining inventory has an estimated value of approximately $500.00 due to current economic conditions which have resulted in a surplus of used office furniture and equipment in South Florida.
According to the report the IOTA, or interest only trust account, proceeds are paid to the Florida Bar. The Florida Bar has received $85,268.34 through May 31, 2012.
From May 1 to May 31, 2012 the following funds were received and distributed.
Net receipts was $237,156 and total operating expenses were $354,814.
The line item for consulting fees of $32,956 is not further broken down to determine who the consultants are. But a statement is made regarding receiver fees.
As of May 31, 2012, the Receiver has incurred unpaid fees and expenses in the amount of $11,425.00 in fees and $5.99 in expenses which represents professional time for the period of April 1, 2012 – May 31, 2012.
The receiver paid out the following funds:
- $29,983.36 to the Florida Attorney General’s Division of Victim Services
- $29,983.37 to the Florida Attorney Genera1’s Seniors Versus Crime Project
- $29,983.37 to Legal Aid Service of Broward County
Additionally the receiver paid out 32 recently issued replacement checks of the 16,167 disbursement checks (having a total value of $1,877,99) sent on December 30, 2010 that remain unpaid.
Ongoing litigation is summarized as:
- Daniel J. Stermer as Receiver v. Joe Jacucci, Case No. 08-43490 (08) (Cir.Ct., Broward Cty., Florida) The Receiver argued its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Count IV of Receiver’s Complaint on February 27, 2012, at 2:00 p.m., and the Court entered the Partial Final Summary Judgment in favor of the Receiver. The Receiver tiled a notice of Voluntary Dismissal of all other counts of the complaint against Defendant on April 4, 2012.
- Daniel J. Stermer as Receiver v, The Credit Exchange Corporation, Case No.08-64343 (08) (S.D. Fla.) The Receiver settled with The Credit Exchange Corporation and Credit Exchange LLC (“Defendants”), who agreed to make payments to the Receiver and stipulated to a judgment which was entered by the Court on 7/27/10. Defendants breached the settlement agreement by non-payment, and the Receiver has perfected a judgment lien against Defendants, both of whom are located in California, and continues efforts to satisfy the judgment against Defendants.
- Daniel J. Stermer as Receiver v. Steven Vanderhoojf Case No. 11-CV-62076-Zloch/Rosenbaum (S.D. Fla); Demand was served upon Steven Vanderhoof in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and Mr. Vanderhoofs Personal Guaranty of Defendant’s obligation pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. The Receiver filed suit in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Case No.: 11-CV-62076-Zloch/Rosenbaum, and obtained service on Mr. Vanderhoof, who was found to reside in Chicago, Illinois, on October 4, 2011. On October 31, 2011, the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida entered a Default against Steven Vanderhoof. The Court entered Default Final Judgment against Steven Vanderhoof on November 18, 2011. The Receiver has submitted necessary paperwork to reduce the judgment to a lien in Illinois and California.
- Daniel .I Stermer, as Receiver v. l.rtPlaiinu1n Financial, LLC, Case No.: ll-58l3 (08) (Cir. Ct. Broward Cty., Florida); On April 23, 2011, counsel for lst Platinum filed a Motion to Quash Service, which was heard by the Court on November 30, 2011. The Court denied the Motion, and Ordered lst Platinum to file an Answer in response to the Plaintiff/Receiver’s Complaint within 20 days from entry of the Order, or December 20, 2011. On January 5, 2012, the Receiver tiled a motion for clerk’s default for lst Platinum’s failure to serve a paper in response to the Court’s Order of December 20, 2011. The Clerk entered a default judgment and then removed the default judgment from its docket advising that a judicial default must be entered since lst Platinum had filed a paper (the Motion to Quash Service) in this proceeding. Thereafter, the Receiver tiled a motion for judicial default with the Broward County Clerk’s Office on January 31, 2012.
A Judicial Default was entered on January 31, 2012. On March 5, 2012, the Receiver’s counsel served the Defendant with a Motion for Final Judgment by Judicial Default Against the Defendant. On March 6, 2012, the Court entered a Final Default Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff/Receiver, Daniel J. Stermer, and Against Defendant, lst Platinum Financial, LLC, also known as First Platinum Financial, LLC. The Receiver engaged a process server to serve a copy ofthe Order upon the principal Lisa Dill, and was advised by the process server that Lisa Dill no longer lives at the address on file. Attempts are being made to locate Lisa Dill’s current address.
- Daniel J. Stermer, as Receiver v. United Family Services, Inc., also known as United Family Services of Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation, Case No.: ll-005812 (08) (Cir. Ct. Broward Cty., Florida); Final Default Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff/Receiver, Daniel J. Stenner, and Against Defendant, United Family Services, Inc., also known as United Family Services of Florida, Inc.
(“UFS”) was entered April 29, 2011. Judgment Debtor UFS failed to timely complete and submit to counsel Form 1977, the information Fact Sheet, and the Receiver has tiled a Motion for Order to Show Cause which was argued on August 4, 2011. The Court entered an Order requiring Judgment Debtor to produce the Rule 1.977 fact information sheet by August 29, 2011. Thereafter, the Receiver filed its Motion for imposition of Sanctions Against Judgment Debtor for Failing to Comply with the Court’s Order of August 5, 2011. On November 30, 2011 the Court Granted the Plaintiffs Motion entering an Order requiring the Defendant to serve one hundred and seventy nine days (179) in the Broward County Jail which sentence may be purged by paying twelve hundred dollars ($1,200.00) to cover the Plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and complying with the Court’s August 5, 2011 Order.
The November 30, 2011, Order also required the Judgment Debtor corporation to pay a fine in the amount of $10,000.00 In accordance with the Judge’s ruling, on January 3, 2012, an Order issued Finding Judgment Debtor in Contempt of Court and lmposing Sanctions Against the Judgment Debtor and the Principal of the Judgment Debtor. Pursuant to the terms of the Order, the Receiver engaged a process server who served copy of the Order on the principal on January 9, 2012. No response has been received from the Judgment Debtor. Counsel for the Receiver has drafted a Writ of Bodily Attaclnnent to apprehend the principal of the Defendant and will file it after review and approval.
The Receiver is continuing to review the remaining marketing/advertising companies that referred clients to the Receivership Entities and certain third~parties who did business or provided services to the Receivership Entities to determine whether and which additional lawsuits should be filed.
Despite the readers allegation, I can not find anything that shows the receiver “paid himself over $38,000” that is disclosed on this document.
In looking back over past filings it appears Daniel Stermer is authorized by the court to charge $250 for his time and in February he billed $14,150, in March he billed $11,225, in April he billed $4,300. – Source
CBDC Account Management Terminated
As a followup to this court filing, on June 13, 2012 the court granted a motion from the receiver to transfer the servicing of accounts from CBDC to the Receivership Estate. – Source
You are not alone. I'm here to help. There is no need to suffer in silence. We can get through this. Tomorrow can be better than today. Don't give up.
I can always use your help. If you have a tip or information you want to share, you can get it to me confidentially if you click here.