Advertisement

Figure in Redman Real Estate Scandal Found in Contempt

Share

A judge on Thursday found the former receiver for the scandal-plagued Marshall Redman real estate holdings in contempt of court for failing to provide audited accounts of cash and property and for ignoring an order to appear.

With a stern warning that a jail cell awaits him if he continues to delay, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert H. O’Brien declared receiver Donald W. Henry in contempt of court and gave him until the end of the year to appear and account for his 10-month stint as receiver in the Redman land fraud case.

Under Henry’s tenure, prosecutors allege, the Redman receivership came to a virtual standstill, leaving about 1,500 Redman victims in limbo. The 50-year-old Calabasas resident was fired last November amid allegations he solicited kickbacks from a receivership attorney, overbilled the receivership and failed to provide a regular accounting of his expenditures, court records show.

Advertisement

Redman’s three companies were seized in 1994 and the millionaire developer was charged last May after authorities alleged he used questionable tactics to sell undeveloped desert property to unsophisticated Latinos.

Henry was appointed in June 1994 and managed to clear title for only a handful of Redman customers before he was fired, prosecutors said.

The former receiver, who also was asked last year to resign his post as federal bankruptcy trustee, reportedly left the country for Australia in June.

Henry’s attorney told O’Brien that Henry was reportedly ill and receiving treatment and would be back in the country within 60 days.

Henry’s potential legal problems extend beyond the Redman case.

U.S. Trustee Marcy Tiffany said Thursday that officials have finished an internal investigation of Henry’s activities in more than 250 cases in which he served as a trustee. In February 1995, Tiffany suspended Henry from receiving new bankruptcy cases after officials found numerous irregularities that included “charging excessive expenses and utilizing personnel in a way that was not appropriate.”

Advertisement