that the information was omitted for the specific purpose of perpetrating a fraud and not simply because the debtor was careless or failed to fully understand his attorney’s instructions.” In re Dubrowsky, 244 B.R. at 571-72. Additionally, the party objecting to discharge under Section 727(a)(4)(A) must prove that the debtor made the intentionally false statement “ “with respect to a material matter, that is one bearing a relationship to the debtor’s business transactions or estate or which would lead to the discovery of assets, business dealings or existence or disposition of property.’” In re Murray, 249 B.R. at 228 (quoting Walters v. Sawyer (In re Sawyer), 130 B.R. 384, 394 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1991)). See St. Clair v. Cadles of Grassy Meadows II, LLC, 550 B.R. 655, 674 (E.D.N.Y. 2016) (<HOLDING>); Gardner v. Gardner (In re Gardner), 384 B.R.
holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code holding that  an item is material if it is related to the debtors business transactions or estate which would lead to the discovery of assets business dealings or existence or disposition of property  quoting in re murray 249 br at 228 holding that the debtors false statements about the location of assets of the estate were material to the proceedings holding that if dispute involves funds that are not property of estate it cannot be maintained in the bankruptcy court unless it is related to the bankruptcy proceeding which means it is likely to affect the debtors estate holding that a claim which impacts the ultimate disposition of the bankruptcy estate is included in related to jurisdiction under  1334b