admitted that prior to the September 5th hearing he made no effort to obtain copies of the alleged 2008 agreements or the other agreements between him and his wife pursuant to which he alleges her interest in the entities was established. Transcript 9/5/2012, 28:15-22. Without making any inferences from the Debtor’s apparent inability to produce these documents, this Court concluded that his failure to produce evidence supporting his assertion that the entities are held with his wife as entireties property constituted evidence of mismanagement. See, e.g., In re Oklahoma Refining Co., 888 F.2d 1133, 1136 (10th Cir.1988) (“failure to keep adequate records and make prompt and complete reports justifies the appointment of a trustee”); Tradex Corp. v. Morse, 339 B.R. 823, 833 (D.Mass.2006) (<HOLDING>); In re Philadelphia Athletic Club, Inc., 15
recognizing that debtors failure to provide creditors information about business operations justified appointment of trustee holding that the interest of the public  especially the debtor and creditors  could limit compensation to a debtors counsel holding that a chapter 7 trustee was the only person with authority to bring  a cause of action after the appointment of a trustee recognizing that the incremental costs of appointment of a trustee typically outweigh the benefit that may accrue to the debtors estate holding that a bankruptcy trustee is barred from pursuing claims for injuries particularized to certain creditors