Michael D. J. Eisenberg v. Shirley Swain

The undisputed facts and circumstances demonstrate that the lower courts’ decisions lack both factual and legal sufficiency – simply put, pursuant to Bingham v. Goldberg, Marchesano, Kohlman, Inc., they are wrong. The lower (local) courts have demonstrated a failure to understand and properly implement federal bankruptcy law. I. Whether a local court can order release of core bankruptcy funds when it does not assume concurrent jurisdiction per 28 U.S.C. § 1334 (b) II. Whether a local court can create ad hoc federal bankruptcy law by misapplying federal bankruptcy laws when it (finally) carries out its concurrent jurisdiction per 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). III. Whether a local court’s orders (and subsequent orders) are void ib abnito when premised on a failure to assume jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) or fails to execute federal bankruptcy laws based on law and fact.