American court hearing recordings and interviews - Listen to the BlockFills 4/17/2026 bankruptcy hearing in Delaware (In re Reliz Technology Group Holdings)

Episode Date: April 17, 2026

--

All right. Please be seated. Mr. Hurst, good to see you. Good afternoon. Welcome back. Yes, good afternoon, Your Honor. Thank you for making time for us today. That's kind of what I do, so happy to be here.

Well, we've used the time since yesterday's hearing constructively. Good. And I'm pleased to say that we have reached a resolution amongst the debtors, the Bertram parties, Celsius, and the committee, and when I say Bertram parties, that's 154-8-1-199. Alberga Limited and Robert J. Bertram. So we reached a resolution which would provide for a number of things. First would be the consensual withdrawal by the Bertram parties of their motion to lift the automatic stay.

Second, it would be a consensual entry of the preliminary injunction order. Okay. And third, it would be consensual entry of the third interim cash collateral order subject to addition to certain language. And it's not a lot of language, but this language has been reviewed by the Bertram Party, Celsius, the committee. The debtors obviously in the office of the United States trustee. And those parties are in agreement that this language is acceptable. and would provide for the entry of that order on a consensual basis. So put my reading glasses on, Your Honor, and then I'd like to read it into the record.

The language that would be added to the order is neither the third interim order nor any such use of cash collateral by the debtors during the interim period. Interim period is a defined term. It's defined into order. Okay. Just means the period between now and the next interim order. shall be a basis on which to deny, impeach, contradict, or negate the constructive trust claim of Bertram and 154-819-Halborda-Linited, or any defense of the debtors, the committee, Celsius, or other parties in interest there too. Okay. So with the addition of that language, that would be a consensual order, and like I said, it would be the other elements of the proposed resolution.

I think that's everything I have said. You have comment. Thank you, Mr. Debris. I don't quarrel with anything Mr. Hearst said. I just want to make sure that the motion to withdraw, the motion to lift the stay is withdrawn without prejudice to making the future motion in the future. And our consent to have the preliminary injunction to prevent the Illinois action from proceeding against either of the the debtors or the individuals is also without prejudice to moving to modify or vacated at any time, which is standard for preliminary injunction hearings.

I know Your Honor knows that, but just to make sure the record doesn't establish any further waiver, I restate it here. And then finally, my final point is we, just a preview. I'm not asking for any language in the order, but I expect and want and need expedited discovery because I'm dead serious on the tracing claim. And if it turns out the tracing claim cannot be made for some reason or another or cost prohibitive to continue the tracing, then I'll say so. But I'm dead serious about it, and I want expedited discovery on it. And I'm not asking Frank commitment.

I'm just saying that we've now had the pleasure of appearing before you and meeting opposing counsel, and we know where you are and what motions to make if we have to make them. Yes, absolutely. Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you, Judge. Let me hear from the committee. And Mr. Hayden, good afternoon. I'm going to get to you.

I see you there. Good afternoon, Your Honor. Eric Monso, Morris-James, a proposed counsel for the Federal Committee wants from your creditors. So we think today, Your Honor, that this is a pretty good result considering where we are in the case. The committee certainly takes the allegations and the issues before, and I think resolving those issues today on a contentable basis

actually saves the estate a fair bit of money. This is in a particularly, it's a relatively thin case, and particularly the, and I say that with considering the amounts that are sort of at stake. The committee certainly has a lot of concerns with regard to the allegations with regard to tracing. And as I mentioned in our limited objection that the committee has retained FTI as its proposed financial party in helping and assisting them with regard to the analysis with regard to tracing. So while FTI will conduct its own investigation regarding how they intend to move forward with regard to the issues that involve tracing of assets, we want to be very clear that a number of committee members, a number of logicure creditors have very similar issues as the parties that have raised those today.

But we are, those issues aren't being decided today, right? We were prepared to move forward with to go to those issues, and those issues aren't being decided. Where we're here today on a consensual basis is with regard to the cash collateral motion, which is going to be on an interim basis for its two weeks. The committee does have concerns and has been working very, very productively with BRG as well as the FDI and so on, to make sure that we're preserving, essentially, preserving the status quo, understanding that the assets are involved, involved a number of

parties. And so all of our constituents and the unsecured creditors do believe that there are significant issues that need to be addressed, whether it's before the next interim or final or so on. But what we're trying to do is just move to the next stage in the case, to let folks have equal opportunity to the courthouse to move forward and do what they need to do. So with that, Your Honor, we are prepared to sign off on the third interim cash collateral. glad that the issues have been resolved for purposes of today. And so, the other issues with regard to state relief or all rights are certainly reserved by all parties. And I implore any

creditor or anybody else that has issues and would like to talk about what the committee is doing because those issues are shared by a number of creditors that they reach out to us. And we can certainly have those conversations. We had conversations from Mr. Patterson before today, leading up to the hearing and so on to make sure that everybody's comfortable and that what the committee is doing in this case to pick the rule very seriously and that we certainly

want to be very respectful of courts' time but also understanding that the committee as well as the parties involved, all the creditors certainly have a vested interest in this case. So thank you, Your Honor. I appreciate that, Mr. Monsa. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Hayes. Thank you, Your Honor.

I apologize for the informalities and not being able to be there in person. I just joined this case this week, and I'm getting caught up. Also, my pro hoc is still pending. Yeah, no worries there, and it will be entered, and I'm certainly happy to hear from you. Don't stand the ceremony of that. And one last little thing, my local counsel just notified me that he could not be in the room today. I know that's a Delaware rule that local counsel will be there. and if you would allow, I'd still give a few words.

Of course, I'm delighted to hear from you. Thank you. So, Your Honor, we are uncomfortable with the cash collateral order. Arthur Investments made a secured loan in November and December of 3,500 to the debtors. The collateral by the master loan agreement was to be delivered, and it never was. we now understand why. They made no representations of insolvency. They made no mention or disclosures of the reorg efforts.

So we would like to object, and we would like to leave to file objection to the cash collateral order. Okay. So we do that oral motion or written, and I'm absorbing the new information that I just heard, and I am not quite sure how the interplay works. I have not been involved in the conversations with the committee thus far. We did make efforts, local council made efforts to work with the debtors on establishing that our collateral was secured. We changed some letters, and they filed the adversary proceedings for a declaratory judgment that it was not. I believe that within the cash collateral motions and discussions, it could effectively summary judgment on the adversary

proceedings. So we are we would request time to file our formal objections in briefs before the order is executed. Well let me ask you this. I know that that Arthur entered an appearance this case in this case on the 19th which is four days after the case was filed and has received notices along the way of his entry of the the first interim order, the second interim order, and the proposed third interim order, and hasn't raised any objections. And I don't know what the objections are, but I guess why are we at the hearing and Arthur is now seeking leave to file a late objection? That's a very fair question. I expect if you're

and I do wish local council was here to help me on that. But my understanding is, you know, as broad, I'm after this adversary proceeding was filed against Arthur, which was very recent, which raised their attention to the fact that they're being classified as unsecured, which is absolutely incorrect. And, you know, getting caught up on the fraud aspects, what was going to be my primary pursuit and pursuing arbitration, perhaps. But within the proceedings, we thought the most efficient thing to do was now

raise it. We're month in. There's a lot of important issues and facts to still be established. I'm very supportive of Mr. Patterson's expedite discovery. I think that's going to be critical in this case. And so I do believe there's good cause

given, you know, it's only been a month since this was filed. I know sometimes he's moved fast. The adversary proceedings against us. And we also did make attempts to work with the debtors offline in an efficient manner to establish our secure position, and without giving notice, they filed the adversary proceeding against us. So now we're forced into the fray, and we're

trying to play a little catch-up, I admit, but I do believe it's going to discretion to court in equitable for us to have a seat at the table and raise our voice at this. Yeah, I'll hear from the debtors, but here's my observation on it. Arthur appears on the list of 30 largest creditors that was filed with the petition on March 15th as the third largest unsecured creditor of the debtors. So Arthur has had notice of the fact that the debtors have classified them as an unsecured creditor

for in excess of a month now. And I appreciate it, and I certainly empathize as a former practicing lawyer empathize that you've brought into the case and have put a fresh set of eyes on it and, you know, are doing your assessment and figuring out where things are. But at this stage, I would – I'm not going to grant leave to file a late objection, but that doesn't mean that your rights or Arthur's rights are prejudiced with respect to a fourth intro order or final order and certainly any arguments that you that Arthur wishes to raise that time are fully preserved but you know if it were a matter of Arthur not having

received notice of its proposed treatment in this case it that may have been that may be a different story but I think our Arthur has been been on notice and been receiving notice this entire time. Did the debtors have anything, they wish to say, given my observations? Thank you, Your Honor. Greg Simon on behalf of the debtors. No, that was the exact point that we were going to make.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Simon. So, you know, the debtors will be seeking further relief regarding cash collateral. This is an interim order. And again, Mr. Hayden, I welcome Arthur's participation in those proceedings. Okay? Thank you, Your Honor.

Thank you. Anybody, yes, please. Good afternoon, Your Honor. Ethan Sewell and Potter-Anerson, Karen, appearing on behalf of the Richard E. Award revocable trust. Yes. We just learned of this consensual resolution today that would grant the Alberta parties a

reservation of rights with respect to their constructive trust claim. My client filed a joinder to the Bertram Party's objection at docket number 105. That was before the second cash collateral hearing, but we would respectfully request that our rights to assert constructive trust claims would be preserved with similar language to what the Dyers have proposed for the Bertram parties. Okay. Have you had a discussion with counsel for the debtors and Celsius and the committee about this request? It was made to the debtors just briefly before the hearing.

Before the hearing? Okay. I'll hear from other parties in that before decide what to do. Under Greg Steinman on behalf of the debtors again. So I just wanted to set the stage procedurally on what transpired. So there was a objection that was filed by the Bertram parties to the second interim order, which the Ward revocable Trust filed a joinder to. They did not file a joinder, and the second interim order was then entered, they did not file a joinder to the newest objection that was filed by the Bertram parties, which is the subject of this resolution. And this resolution also settles a disputed matter in this case, which is not pending with Mr. Ward or the Ward revocable trust.

so that we can't agree to that language. It opens the door to every predator wanting to the same language. They're not subject to an ongoing dispute, and they didn't actually file an objection to the third interim order. Okay. Okay. Does the committee wish to be heard? Thank you, Your Honor. And this is sort of one of the concerns I've tried to address

by making my marks that I feel like to figure a lot of M2s, which I appreciate, right? But the interim order does provide that, and this is, paragraph 16, and hopefully it gets where folks may need to be, that nothing herein shall be deemed to waver any party's rights, respect to any final order, or all party parties' rights with respect to the same are reserved, including, without limitation, the committee's right to challenge the validity, perfection, scope, and the amount of any pre-petition claims or liens of the pre-petition secured parties and waivers of claims against pre-petition creditors. So it does specifically provide to the committee, but it does

also say that there's no waiver of parties' rights, because we're in any party. So it's not limited. It's not limited. So if folks want to raise these issues, which I think will get a lot of them now, and I don't know, I don't want, I'm not encouraging that. So I'm asking, like, if folks want to reach out to us, we can try to streamline a lot of this,

because I think a lot of it's just information that might be necessary, because as I mentioned, FTIs, as the financial advisors of the committee, are going to be going through a lot of this work as well, and certainly with all purposes of confidentiality and working through those issues. But these are issues that are focused not just

on one creditor, but all. That's what, that's we're hopeful that a committee can add value and streamline a lot of these issues so your, the court can, you know, to use resources as may need it. So I think that language includes it. Because, again, we're only an interim period.

And that's why we're here, but it pushes up for two weeks and hopefully maybe two weeks from now we'll be here again because it depends on how information past and who it gets to and what to develop process and procedures and so on for all that for folks that are interested but folks to reach out to me I'm not inviting you know I'm certainly inviting folks to to talk but but certainly I think that the language

is is included okay thank you I appreciate that thank you very much mr. Walker you've been waiting patiently do you wish to be heard your honor look I think your order says what it says it is an appropriate balancing between the needs of today and the needs of tomorrow. And rather than get into any interpretational gymnastics, I think we'll stand silent until the next interim and the final hearing. The debtor has received the usage of our cash collateral in order to bring the case forward, and we've received protections in the order to exchange for that, and I think the thing speaks

for itself. Thank you very much, Mr. Wofford. Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard on the cash collateral issues? Okay, I hear no response. I'm going to enter a third interim cash collateral order with the language that's been read into the record. You know, as far as other parties go, the what I'll call the Bertram parties, raised an objection in connection with the third interim cash collateral order. as well as other issues that were the subject of the evidentiary hearing that began yesterday.

I've read the ward joinder, and as I recall, it was a joinder to the initial objection that the Bertram parties filed. And in addition, the ward parties, to my recollection, had a different, materially different type of transaction. with the debtors that may or may not be relevant, but I think the bottom line is that the virtue of parties have asserted their rights continuously throughout the case are here carrying the water. They've negotiated language, and it sounds appropriate to me, so I'm going to approve it on that basis

and overrule any other objections to entry of the third interim order. Thank you, Your Honor. I just want to address housekeeping issues, how we're going to get all this done. Yeah. So the birth and priorities, I assume, would be submitting a notice of withdrawal. And then the debtors will submit a certification of counsel, submitting the cash collateral order with the additional language.

And we'll do that with the red line and everything, but everyone's heard the language now. So we'll do that after the hearing, shortly after the hearing. And then we'll also submit a preliminary injunction order under certification. Now, the PI order, I don't believe we ever file at a PI order, so it's going to be very simple. We'll circulate it to the Bertram parties in Celsius and the committee and the U.S. trustee as a matter of good practice, but we'll just keep it very simple. Yes. Okay, so we'll do that. And then I was going to tell you, with respect to cash collateral, we will send out a notice of the fourth interim hearing, which is set for the 29.

We'll send it out and notice so that just to highlight for everybody that we are seeking entry of a fourth interim order so that parties can, to the extent they want to participate, they're aware. Yes. Just for highlighting it for people. Yes. Okay. And I believe that's everything that my team has to do. Okay. I guess there's one issue that's like not going to be in front of me right now, but that'll be going on.

the background and that's the issue of the discovery that Mr. Patterson referred to. So, you know, I would, I would certainly anticipate that that's something that the parties will be able to handle and agree on a schedule to handle. The case is fast-moving and the any discussions about when discovery should be responded to, should account for the fact that the debtors are moving promptly to get through the case. Understood, Your Honor. Okay. Anything else for me today?

Nothing from me, Your Honor. Thank you, Your Honor. Yes. Thank you, sir. Okay. Well, I wish everybody a good weekend. We're adjourned. Thank you, Your Honor.