The plot thickens.

Tom Hazelrigg III’s attorney, Marc Stern, filed a motion to withdraw from representing Hazelrigg in his bankruptcy.  The reason given is that there is nothing for him to do.  He says that he was hired only to contest venue, and that is lost, and since Hazelrigg intends to not submit schedules, or answer any questions (under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (right against self-incrimination)), there is no role for him as Hazelrigg’s attorney.

Of special note, Stern states in the subjoined declaration that “there is no money to pay [him].”  Correct me anyone, but I think declarations made “to the best of one’s knowledge” are insufficient foundation for admissibility.  We think declarations must be based on personal knowledge, right?  If we were Stern, we sure wouldn’t be signing a declaration attesting that Hazelrigg has no money.  Just sayin’ ….

TEP has no clue how the petitioning creditors will respond.  We guess if Hazelrigg remains silent – i.e. won’t be defending - it will be easy for Rigby and Co. to win the numerous fraudulent transfer actions and other veil-piercing lawsuits we expect against Hazelrigg, his kids, the various Centurion entities, ANT ONE, TRH Lenders or whatever else is out there…  So maybe Hazelrigg just made Rigby’s job easy.