Case KLP Doc 194 Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

Transcription

1 Document Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION In re: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC, a Virginia professional limited liability company, et al., Debtors. 1 Chapter 11 Case No (Joint Administration MOTION OF CREDITOR DUSTIN JOHNSON FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER CONTINUING FOR 60 DAYS THE MOTION TO EXTEND THE AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 105(A AND 362 OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT THEREOF Creditor Dustin Johnson, by his undersigned counsel, files this motion ( Motion for Reconsideration seeking reconsideration of the Order Continuing for 60 Days the hearing on the Debtors Motion to Extend the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Sections 105(a and 362 of the Bankruptcy Code. 2 The Court has extended the automatic stay to Mark H. Wittstadt ( M. Wittstadt and Gerard Wm. Wittstadt ( G. Wittstadt and together with M. Wittstadt, the Wittstadts, preventing creditor Dustin Johnson from moving forward with his lawsuit against the Wittstadts personally, without any corresponding safeguards to protect Mr. Johnson s claims for $4 million. Moreover, despite the Debtors and the Wittstadts claiming that their devotion of significant time and resources to the bankruptcy case should relieve them from having to litigate Mr. Johnson s case, Debtor Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC is nevertheless proceeding with 1 The Debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor s federal tax identification number, are: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC (1651, Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, PLLC (1589, Wittstadt Title & Escrow Company, L.L.C. (3831, Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC (1589, MSWLAW, Inc. (6994, Teays Valley Trustees, LLC (9830, and York Trustee Services, LLC ( See Docket No. 59.

2 Document Page 2 of 9 and has not sought to stay its state court case in Fulton County, Georgia against Nathan Hardwick IV and other defendants. To prevent manifest injustice, Mr. Johnson requests that the Court condition the extension of the automatic stay on: a an agreement by the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during the pendency of the extended automatic stay, or a requirement that the Wittstadts post a $4 million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral; and b the submission of sworn testimony from the Wittstadts as to the as to the time and resources they are contributing to the Debtors during the stay, which may be tested by Mr. Johnson through cross examination. In support of the Motion for Reconsideration, Mr. Johnson respectfully states as follows: BACKGROUND 1. The Wittstadts are equity partners in the law firm of Debtor Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC (the Morris Firm. The Wittstadts and the Morris Firm have been Mr. Johnson s lawyers since September 27, Mr. Johnson is the victim of a fraudulent scheme crafted by the Morris Firm and the Wittstadts whereby they obtained $3,000,000 from Mr. Johnson (with the promise to pay back $4,000,000 for the purpose of keeping the Morris Firm afloat following the discovery that millions of dollars of escrowed client funds had been misappropriated. A detailed description of the facts and circumstances related to the Wittstadts scheme is set forth in the Objection to the Debtors Motion for Extension of the Automatic Stay, filed on July 24, To recover his funds, Mr. Johnson commenced litigation in United States District Court on around October 28, 2014 (the Johnson Litigation. 4 He has asserted claims against 3 See Docket No Mr. Johnson s lawsuit is captioned as Dustin Johnson v. Morris Schneider Wittstadt, LLC fka Morris Hardwick Schneider, LLC, MSLAW, Inc. fka MHSLAW, Inc., Nathan Hardwick IV, Esq., Mark Wittstadt, Esq., and Gerard 2

3 Document Page 3 of 9 the Morris Firm, and the Wittstadts individually, for breach of oral/implied contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, money had and received, conversion/trover, among other claims. Mr. Johnson was directed to wire $3,000,000 into an account entitled Equity Partners Account. Accordingly, it is inconceivable that the Wittstadts (two of three equity partners are not liable to Mr. Johnson. 4. On July 5, 2015, during the pendency of the Johnson Litigation, the Debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code, 11 U.S.C. 101, et seq. (the Bankruptcy Code. 5 The Debtors continue to operate their businesses and property as debtors-in-possession in accordance with Bankruptcy Code Sections 1107 and Neither of the Wittstadts has filed for individual bankruptcy protection. 5. On July 6, 2015, the Debtors filed a motion seeking entry of an order pursuant to Sections 105(a and 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, and Bankruptcy Rule 9007, extending the automatic stay to certain of the Debtors members, managers, and employees, including the Wittstadts ( Motion for Stay On July 7, 2015, the Court entered an interim order granting the Debtors Motion for Stay pending a final hearing on the matter, which the Court set for July 31, 2015 ( Interim Order. 7 The Interim Order specifically stayed the Johnson Litigation against the Wittstadts. 7. On July 31, 2015, the Court entered an Order extending the stay of the Johnson Litigation against the Wittstadts to October 1, 2015 (the July 31 Order. 8 Wm. Wittstadt Jr., Esq., Civil Action No CV , pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division (the Johnson Litigation. 5 See Docket No See Docket No See Docket No See Docket No

4 Document Page 4 of 9 RELIEF REQUESTED 8. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e, applicable in bankruptcy pursuant to FED. R. BANKR. P. 9023, Mr. Johnson moves this Court to reconsider and modify the July 31 Order to condition the stay of the Johnson Litigation (as the stay relates to the Wittstadts on the following: a an agreement by the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during the pendency of the extended automatic stay, except as necessary to pay day-to-day expenses, or require the Wittstadts to post a $4 million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral; and, b a reporting by the Debtors and Wittstadts under oath, through a declaration or live testimony, as to the time and resources the Wittstadts are contributing to the Debtors during the stay (which Johnson may test through cross examination, and a finding by the Court that such contributions are adding value. BASIS FOR RELIEF 9. Bankruptcy Rule 9023, incorporating Civil Rule 59, provides that the Court may alter or amend a judgment, such as the July 31 Order, upon timely motion by a party. [Civil] Rule 59(e grants bankruptcy courts license to reconsider orders and judgments after their entry. See Ellenberg v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. Sys. Of Georgia (In the Matter of Midland Mechanical Contractors, Inc., 200 B.R. 453, 456 (Bankr. N.D.Ga. 1996; See also FED. R. CIV. P. 59(E; FED. R. BANKR. P (references in Civil Rule 59(e to the alteration or amendment of a judgment shall be read to include reconsideration of an order appealable to an appellate court. See Midland Mechanical, 200 B.R. at A party may move for reconsideration of orders issued by bankruptcy courts within the 14 days of the entry of an order or judgment. See FED. R. CIV. P. 59(E; FED. R. CIV. P A court should grant a motion for reconsideration when the moving party shows one of three criteria: (1 there is newly available evidence; (2 there is an intervening change in the controlling law; or (3 there is a need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice. 4

5 Document Page 5 of 9 See Pacific Life Ins. Co. v. Am. Nat l Life Ins. Co., 148 F.3d 396, 403 (4th Cir See also Wolff v. Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp., 2004 WL (4th Cir. 9/30/04 (copy attached; Matter of Prince, 85 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. 1996; Lony v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 935 F.2d 604, 608 (3d Cir Motions for reconsideration serve a valuable function in those limited situations in which they are appropriate. Above the Belt, Inc. v. Mel Bohannan Roofing, Inc., 99 F.R.D. 99 (E.D. Va ARGUMENT 11. In the instant case, reconsideration and modification of the July 31 Order is necessary to prevent manifest injustice to Mr. Johnson. Specifically, the Court should modify the July 31 Order to ensure the Wittstadts do not hide, conceal or abscond with assets while the collection efforts of Mr. Johnson are held in abeyance. 12. The relief granted to the Wittstadts in the July 31 Order is extraordinary and unusual. Generally, the automatic stay is available only to a debtor, and not third party defendants or co-defendants. Lynch v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 710 F.2d 1194, 1197 (6th Cir. 1983; A.H. Robins Co., v. Piccinin, 788 F.2d 994, 999 (4th Cir. 1986; Kreisler v. Goldberg, 478 F.3d 209, 213 (4th Cir As a limited exception to that general rule, the Fourth Circuit has recognized that a stay may be extended to cover non-debtor defendants in unusual circumstances, but only if the court weigh[s] competing interests, maintain[s] an even balance, and justif[ies] the stay by clear and convincing circumstances outweighing potential harm to the party against whom it is operative. Robins, 788 F.2d at 1003 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted (emphasis added. Excluded from the unusual circumstances exception are cases in which the non-bankrupt co-defendant is independently liable to the creditor. CAE Indus. Ltd. v. 5

6 Document Page 6 of 9 Aerospace Holdings Co., 116 B.R. 31, 33 (S.D.N.Y. 1990; Variable-Parameter Fixture Dev. Corp. v. Morpheus Lights, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 603, 608 (S.D.N.Y The July 31 Order does not provide any protections to Mr. Johnson against actions by the Wittstadts to hide, conceal or transfer their assets. Mr. Johnson submits that, at a minimum, the Court should condition the July 31 Order on an agreement by the Wittstadts to freeze their assets, except for the payment of necessary day-to-day expenses, or require the Wittstadts to post a $4 million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral. Without such an assurance, the Wittstadts will be granted free reign to transfer property and dissipate assets while Mr. Johnson s collection efforts are entirely stayed. Such harm would be irreparable. 15. In addition, in their Motion for Stay, the Debtors claim that unusual circumstances exist because, in part, the Wittstadts must devote substantial time and resources to the Debtors bankruptcy cases. However, neither the Wittstadts nor the Debtors have presented any evidence as to the extent, nature or value of the Wittstadts purported contributions since the filing of the Debtors cases in early July. At a minimum, the Wittstadts should be required to report, either through live testimony or a sworn declaration, as to what they are doing for the Debtors and whether such contributions are adding any value. Mr. Johnson requests that the Court condition the July 31 Order on the submission of such evidence by the Wittstadts and permit Johnson to test such evidence through cross examination. 16. Mr. Johnson submits that the request to condition the July 31 Order is reasonable and necessary to prevent manifest injustice, and that any added burdens on the Wittstadts are far outweighed by the potential of irreparable harm and prejudice to Mr. Johnson. The Wittstadts should not be permitted to utilize the extension of the automatic stay as a means to frustrate 6

7 Document Page 7 of 9 further Mr. Johnson s collection efforts without providing corresponding security to ensure that Mr. Johnson is not harmed during the pendency of the stay. 17. For these reasons, Mr. Johnson submits that ample cause exists for the Court to reconsider and modify the July 31 Order to condition the stay of the Johnson Litigation on: a an agreement from the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during the pendency of the extended automatic stay, except as necessary for the payment of day-to-day expenses, or require the Wittstadts to post of a $4 million bond (or provide some other sufficient collateral; and, b a showing that the Wittstadts are contributing value to the Debtors, which showing may be tested by Johnson through cross examination. 18. There is another troubling aspect to the continued extension of the automatic stay to the Wittstadts and the Debtors request on July 31 for the automatic stay to be extended to Nathan Hardwick, a former equity holder of the Debtors and a defendant in the Johnson litigation. The Debtors argued that discovery being served in connection with Johnson s case against Hardwick, which is not stayed, would distract the Debtor and the Wittstadts from their efforts to stabilize the Debtors in the early stages of their chapter 11 cases. The Debtors further argued that they likely could not afford to respond to discovery. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the docket sheet for Morris Hardwick Schneider, LLC (now known as Morris Schneider Wittstadt and Landcastle Title, LLC v. Nathan E. Hardwick, IV and Divot Holdings, LLC, Superior Court of the State of Georgia, Fulton County, Case No. 2014CV In that case, one the Debtors is proceeding against Mr. Hardwick. Nothing in the docket reflects a notification to the Superior Court of the filing of these chapter 11 cases or the imposition of the automatic stay. Indeed, that case is proceeding normally, with discovery apparently ongoing. Debtors and the Wittstadts representations to the Court that participation in Mr. Johnson s case 7

8 Document Page 8 of 9 would be too burdensome and expensive should be viewed in light of their apparent willingness to proceed in a case in which a Debtor is a plaintiff, but not in which a Debtor is a defendant. NOTICE AND HEARING 19. Notice of this Motion for Reconsideration has been provided in accordance with the Notice, Case Management and Administrative Procedures approved by this Court on July 16, Mr. Johnson submits that no other or further notice need be provided. 20. Mr. Johnson believes it is in the best interest of all parties for the Motion for Reconsideration to be heard at the hearing scheduled for August 27, 2015, at 1:00 p.m. WAIVER OF MEMORANDUM OF LAW 21. Mr. Johnson respectfully requests that this Court treat this Motion for Reconsideration as a written memorandum of points and authorities or waive any requirement that this Motion for Reconsideration be accompanied by a written memorandum of points and authorities as described in Local Bankruptcy Rule (G. NO PRIOR REQUEST 22. No previous motion for the relief sought herein has been made to this or any other Court. 9 See Docket No

9 Document Page 9 of 9 CONCLUSION Mr. Johnson respectfully requests that the Court reconsider and modify and condition the July 31 as set forth herein, and award Mr. Johnson such other and further relief as may be just under the circumstances. BARNES & THORNBURG LLP /s/ Devin J. Stone Devin J. Stone, Esq. VA Bar No Suite Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC Telephone: ( Facsimile: ( devin.stone@btlaw.com John W. Mills (pro hac vice Prominence in Buckhead 3475 Piedmont Road, NE Suite 1700 Atlanta, Georgia Telephone: ( Facsimile: ( jwmills@btlaw.com Attorneys for Creditor/Plaintiff Dustin Johnson 9

10 8/13/2015 Page 1 of 3 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Exhibit(s Page 1 of 3 Skip to Main Content Logout My Account Search Menu All Case Records Search Refine Search Back Location : All-Superior Help REGISTER OF ACTIONS CASE NO. 2014CV MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC AND LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC VS. NATHAN E. HARDWICK, IV.; DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC, AND JOHN DOE 1-10 Case Type: DAMAGES Date Filed: 08/25/2014 Location: Business Court 3 Judicial Officer: JUDGE, BUSINESS COURT SB176 Case Cross Reference Number: PARTY INFORMATION Attorneys DEFENDANT DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC Matthew D Daley Retained 3151 MAPLE DR NE ATLANTA, GA (W DEFENDANT HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV. Matthew D Daley Retained 3151 MAPLE DR NE ATLANTA, GA (W DEFENDANT JOHN DOE 1-10 PLAINTIFF LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Jeffrey Hobart Schneider Retained 3500 LENOX ROAD 4TH FLOOR, ONE ALLIANCE CENTER Atlanta, GA (W Edward Davison Burch, Jr. Retained 1230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E. SUITE 3100, PROMENDADE II ATLANTA, GA (W PLAINTIFF MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC Jeffrey Hobart Schneider Retained 3500 LENOX ROAD 4TH FLOOR, ONE ALLIANCE CENTER Atlanta, GA (W Edward Davison Burch, Jr. Retained 1230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E. SUITE 3100, PROMENDADE II ATLANTA, GA (W OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS 08/05/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE 08/05/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT

11 8/13/2015 Page 2 of 3 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Exhibit(s Page 2 of 3 07/06/2015 CERTIFICATE 06/16/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 05/28/2015 ORDER 05/28/2015 SCHEDULING ORDER 05/01/2015 ORDER OF TRANSFER 05/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 04/29/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE 04/10/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE 04/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 04/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 03/06/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 03/04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /12/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC 02/10/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC 02/02/2015 CERTIFICATE 01/26/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC 01/22/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 01/09/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE 01/09/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE 01/05/2015 ANSWER 01/05/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 12/23/2014 OTHER Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC 12/22/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC 12/18/2014 LEAVE OF ABSENCE 12/15/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC 10/07/2014 NON EST SERVICE 10/01/2014 AMENDMENT 09/19/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 09/18/2014 NON EST SERVICE 09/11/2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE Party: JOHN DOE /10/2014 CONSENT ORDER 09/02/2014 LEAVE OF ABSENCE 08/28/2014 CANCELED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (2:00 PM (Judicial Officer WRIGHT, CYNTHIA ISSUE RESOLVED 08/28/2014 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 08/28/2014 RULE NISI 08/25/2014 PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC Party: Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart 08/25/2014 Request for Service HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV. Unserved DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC Unserved

12 8/13/2015 Page 3 of 3 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Exhibit(s Page 3 of 3 08/25/2014 CASE INITIATION FORM Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC Party: Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart FINANCIAL INFORMATION PLAINTIFF MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC Total Financial Assessment Total Payments and Credits Balance Due as of 08/13/ /25/2014 Transaction Assessment /25/2014 Transaction Assessment /25/2014 Payment Receipt # Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart ( /22/2014 Transaction Assessment /22/2014 Payment Receipt # SANDS ANDERSON (8.00

13 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Notice Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION In re: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC, a Virginia professional limited liability company, et al., Debtors. 1 Chapter 11 Case No (Joint Administration NOTICE OF MOTION OF CREDITOR DUSTIN JOHNSON FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER CONTINUING FOR 60 DAYS THE MOTION TO EXTEND THE AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 105(A AND 362 OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on August 14, 2015, Creditor Dustin Johnson, by his undersigned counsel, filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Continuing for 60 days the Motion to Extend the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Sections 105(a and 362 of the Bankruptcy Code ( Motion. The Motion is being served simultaneously with this Notice. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT in connection with these cases, the Order Establishing Certain Notice, Case Management and Administrative Procedures (the Case Management Order was entered by the Court on July 15, 2015, which, among other things, prescribes the manner in which objections must be filed and served and when hearings will be conducted. A copy of the Case Management Order may be obtained at no charge at or for a fee via PACER at 1 The Debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor s federal tax identification number, are: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC (1651, Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, PLLC (1589, Wittstadt Title & Escrow Company, L.L.C. (3831, Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC (1589, MSWLAW, Inc. (6994, Teays Valley Trustees, LLC (9830, and York Trustee Services, LLC (8058.

14 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Notice Page 2 of 4 Your rights may be affected. You should read these papers carefully and discuss them with your attorney, if you have one in these bankruptcy cases. (If you do not have an attorney, you may wish to consult one. Under the Case Management Order, unless a written response to the Application is filed with the Clerk of Court and served on the moving party within three (3 days prior to the next scheduled Omnibus Hearing Date, the Court may deem any opposition waived, treat the Application as uncontested, and issue an order granting the relief requested therein. Accordingly, if you do not want the Court to grant the relief sought in the Application, then on or before August 24, 2015, you must file with the Court, either electronically or at the address shown below, a written response pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule If you mail your response to the Court for filing, you must mail it early enough so the Court will receive it on or before the date stated above. _X_ Electronically file with the Court, at the address shown below, a written response with supporting memorandum pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rules and (H. You must mail or otherwise file it early enough so the Court will receive it on or before the due date identified herein. Clerk of the Court United States Bankruptcy Court 701 E. Broad Street, Suite 4000 Richmond, VA _X_ In accordance with the Case Management Order, you or your attorney must also serve a copy of your written objection upon the undersigned as well as on the Core Group and 2

15 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Notice Page 3 of 4 the 2002 List, as such terms are defined in the Case Management Order so that the documents are received on or before the due date identified herein. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT to the extent a timely objection is filed, on August 27, 2015 at 1:00 p.m., (or such time thereafter as the matter may be heard the undersigned will appear before The Honorable Keith L. Phillips, United States Bankruptcy Judge, in Room 5100 of the United States Courthouse, 701 East Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219, and will move the Court for entry of an order approving the Application. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT If you or your attorney do not take the steps required in this Notice, the Court may deem any opposition waived, treat the Applications as conceded, and issue orders granting the requested relief without further notice or hearing. PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY. BARNES & THORNBURG LLP /s/ Devin J. Stone Devin J. Stone, Esq. VA Bar No Suite Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC Telephone: ( Facsimile: ( devin.stone@btlaw.com John W. Mills (admitted pro hac vice Prominence in Buckhead 3475 Piedmont Road, NE Suite 1700 Atlanta, Georgia Telephone: ( Facsimile: (

16 Case KLP Doc Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Notice Page 4 of 4 jwmills@btlaw.com Attorneys for Creditor/Plaintiff Dustin Johnson 4