IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
|
|
- Nickolas Jefferson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE, Debtor. Case No svk Chapter 11 Hon. Susan V. Kelley SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS AND POLICY BUY-BACK AGREEMENTS The Archdiocese of Milwaukee, the debtor and debtor-in-possession (the Debtor or Archdiocese ), respectfully submits this supplemental Brief in support of its Motion for Order Approving Settlement Agreements and Policy Buy-Back Agreements (Dkt. No. 2908) (the Motion ) and in response to certain questions raised by the Court in the February 10, 2015 Hearing on the Motion (Appearances and Summary of Hearing, February 10, 2015, ECF Dkt. No ). I. The Coverage Uncertainty Underscores Why the Settlements Are Appropriate and Easily Above the Lowest Point In the Range of Reasonableness. The Court directed the parties to address whether cases that the Court s independent research yielded (the Coverage Cases ) affect the parties positions as to whether the definition of occurrence applies to the conduct alleged. The Coverage Cases can be summarized as follows: First, they are from foreign jurisdictions and do not interpret Wisconsin law. As such, none of them are binding or precedential authority. Second, many of them are factually Daryl L. Diesing Bruce G. Arnold Francis H. LoCoco Lindsey M. Greenawald Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek S.C. 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1900 Milwaukee, Wisconsin Telephone: (414) Facsimile: (414) flococo@whdlaw.com Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 10
2 distinguishable because of the specific endorsements contained in those policies or because the case involved a duty to defend instead of a duty to indemnify. Third, none of these cases holds that negligent misrepresentation is, as a matter of law, covered by insurance, let alone that such a finding would comport with Wisconsin s public policy regarding permissible insurance coverage. Fourth, regardless of the legal analysis contained in those cases, whether negligent misrepresentation is a covered claim is, from the Claimants perspective, at best, a fact-issue -- meaning individual case-by-case determinations for all 575+ claims. 1 In short, these cases underscore why the Settlements should be approved under the Seventh Circuit s above the lowest point in the range of reasonableness standard. The Coverage Cases do not hold there is coverage for the claims. They only highlight what the Settling Insurers have vigorously reminded the Archdiocese all along -- the prospects that there will be coverage for any of these claims is remote at best. II. There is No Duty to Disclose. There is no claim for negligent misrepresentation for non-disclosure. Even assuming, arguendo, that the alleged negligent misrepresentation was a viable, non-time barred claim for relief, it is factually impossible to sustain a negligent misrepresentation claim based on nondisclosure. The crux of a negligent misrepresentation claim is that the Archdiocese did not 1 During the hearing on February 10, 2015, the Committee acknowledged that determining whether negligent misrepresentation is covered would require individual jury trials: [Richler]: The A.O. Smith case is the only case that says -- the overall rule is that you don t it s not a matter of law that you can determine negligent misrepresentation. What it said doesn t deal with negligent misrepresentation specifically, but it says there s an overall rule that says that [it s] subjective and [it s] an issue for a jury. I understand that could mean lots of trials, but I agree with Mr. Finnegan this could be sequenced in a way that could not require -- this issue doesn t have to be determined 300 times. Transcript of Oral Arg., 17:12-20 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. Feb. 10, 2015). WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 10
3 know, but should have known, that the perpetrator was an abuser. If the Archdiocese did not know the perpetrator had previously abused someone, it is impossible to disclose what the Archdiocese did not know. See John Doe 67C v. Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 700 N.W.2d 180, (Wis. 2005). Accordingly, most courts to address the issue have soundly rejected a negligentmisrepresentation by non-disclosure claim. See Eberts v. Goderstad, 569 F.3d 757, 765 (7th Cir. 2009) ( Negligent misrepresentation by nondisclosure is a claim of questionable heritage and has been soundly rejected in some jurisdictions. ) (citing Martin v. Ohio State Univ. Found., 742 N.E.2d 1198, 1209 (Ohio Ct. App. 2000) ( A negligent misrepresentation claim does not lie for omissions: there must be an affirmative false statement. ); Johnson v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., No. 13-cv-144-wmc, 2014 WL at *4 n.5 (W.D. Wis. Sep. 12, 2014) ( Wisconsin does not recognize a claim for... negligent misrepresentation based on a failure to disclose. ); Kaloti Enters., Inc. v. Kellogg Sales Co., 699 N.W. 2d 205, 212 n.3 (Wis. 2005); Binette v. Dyer Library Ass n, 688 A.2d 898, 903 (Me. 1996); Richey v. Patrick, 904 P.2d 798, 802 (Wyo. 1995); Matthews v. Kincaid, 746 P.2d 470, 471 (Alaska 1987)). A person may have a duty to disclose based on a contractual or statutory obligation, or because of the factual situation surrounding the transactions and relationship of the parties. Matter of Lecic s Estate, 312 N.W.2d 773, (Wis. 1981); Prod. Credit Ass n of Lancaster v. Croft, 423 N.W.2d 544 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988); Grube v. Daun, 496 N.W.2d 106 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). There is no contractual or statutory obligation imposing a duty to disclose in this case. Accordingly, the only potential basis for imposing a duty to disclose, assuming it is possible for the Archdiocese to disclose what it did not even know, is based on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the situation and the relationship between the parties. But WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 3 of 10
4 Wisconsin courts -- recognizing the havoc that would ensue if a legally binding, fiduciary relationship arose for every relationship that involved trust -- have repeatedly declined to find that a fiduciary relationship arises simply because the plaintiff placed trust and confidence in the other party. See Johnson v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., 973 F. Supp. 950, 957 (W.D. Wis. 2013) (citing Croft, 423 N.W.2d at 458); Jackson v. McKay-Davis Funeral Home, Inc., 830 F. Supp. 2d 635, (E.D. Wis. 2011). Further, the mere fact of reliance on representations... does not... create a relationship of trust and confidence leading to a fiduciary duty. Jackson, 830 F. Supp. 2d at 648 (quoting Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. Boeck Inc., 377 N.W.2d 605 (Wis. 1985)) (citations omitted). Moreover, the vast majority of courts to have considered this question have held that, notwithstanding any religious and/or moral obligation that there may be between a parishioner and a priest, there is no legally binding fiduciary relationship simply because of a parishioner s relationship with a priest or the church s relationship with its flock. See, e.g., Casey v. Reidy,, 906 N.E.2d 1139, (Ohio Ct. App. 2009) (despite the broad definition of the term fiduciary in Ohio, refusing to find a de facto fiduciary relationship, because there was not complete dependence by the inferior party, and noting that [o]ther states that have considered the issue have rejected a per se fiduciary relationship between the clergy and their congregants.... ); Gaines v. Krawczyk, 354 F. Supp. 2d 573, 584 (W.D. Pa. 2004) ( [I]t has consistently been recognized that the mere existence of a pastor-parishioner relationship does not in itself give rise to a fiduciary duty. ); Doe v. Holy See (State of Vatican City), 793 N.Y.S.2d 565, 568 (App. Div. 2005) ( [T]he plaintiff may not merely rely on the church s status in general in order to show the existence of a fiduciary relationship with an institutional church defendant.... ). This is important, because -- mindful of the Motion before the Court -- this only goes to highlight the WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 4 of 10
5 expense that would likely be involved in litigating these claims. The Claimants would each have to make an individual showing that a special relationship substantially beyond the clergy/congregant relationship arose between the parties. The fact that certain Claimants are not even willing to concede the absence of a viable claim for relief perfectly illustrates why the Settlements should be approved, because for every dollar spent on litigation resolving legally infirm claims, there is one less dollar available to pay claims. In the few cases that have recognized a fiduciary relationship, the courts have relied not on the parishioner/student and diocese relationship, but on particular facts about the relationship and interactions between the diocese and the plaintiff. See, e.g., Martinelli v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 196 F.3d 409 (2d Cir. 1999) (recognizing a fiduciary relationship based on factual circumstances of the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendantdiocese). III. The Bankruptcy Court Has Jurisdiction to Approve the Settlement. District courts, and, by referral from district courts, bankruptcy courts have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of all civil proceedings rising under title 11, or arising in or related to cases under title U.S.C. 1334(b); 28 U.S.C This includes exclusive jurisdiction over all property of the estate. 28 U.S.C. 1334(e). The bankruptcy jurisdiction is designed to provide a single forum for dealing with all claims to the bankrupt s assets. Elscint, Inc. v. First Wis. Fin. Corp. (In re Xonics, Inc.), 813 F.2d 127, 131 (7th Cir. 1987). The Court either has exclusive jurisdiction to approve the Settlements because they involve property of the estate or the Court has related to jurisdiction because the Settlements affect the administration of the estate. Either way the bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to approve the Settlements. It cannot be questioned that the bankruptcy court has the exclusive jurisdiction to determine claims against the Debtor s assets. 28 U.S.C. 1334(e) ( The district court in which a WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 5 of 10
6 case under title 11 is commenced or is pending shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all the property, wherever located, of the debtor as of the commencement of such case, and of property of the estate. ); Tennessee Student Assistance Corp. v. Hood, 541 U.S. 440, (2004) ( A bankruptcy court s in rem jurisdiction permits it to determin[e] all claims that anyone, whether named in the action or not, has to the property or thing in question. The proceeding is one against the world. ) (citation omitted); In re Energy Co-op, Inc., 886 F.2d 921, 929 (7th Cir. 1989) ( With respect to the jurisdictional issue, it is well established that a bankruptcy court has jurisdiction over all of the property of the debtor s estate, wherever located. ); In re Xonics, Inc., 813 F.2d at ( [R]esolving competing claims to property that belonged to the debtor when it filed a petition in bankruptcy is one of the central functions of bankruptcy law. ). At their core, the Settlements are a resolution of all claims against certain assets of the Debtor -- the Debtor s insurance policies. Any abuse claim that was brought in this chapter 11 proceeding or that could be brought necessarily implicates the Debtor s insurance policies -- assets of the estate. Resolution of claims against a debtor s assets is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court. Further, a bankruptcy court has related to jurisdiction over any matter that affects the amount of property available for distribution or the allocation of property among creditors. Id. at 131. Any Abuse Claim that could be brought would affect the property available for distribution, because the Abuse Claims involve claims against the Debtor s insurance policies. Further, litigation of Abuse Claims will likely entail discovery and litigation aimed at the Debtor. The Settling Insurer s insistence that the Settlements include separate consideration for both the sale and buy-back of the Archdiocese s insurance policies, and a section 105 release to implement the sale, forms the basis for this Court s approval of this global settlement. Absent WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 6 of 10
7 the parishes consent to relinquish their insurance coverage, State Court Counsel will continue to sue each of the Settling Insurers directly, which means that the Settlements will never occur. Claimants contend that they have direct-action rights. The Debtor vigorously disputes the existence of any direct action rights. The Claimants suggestion that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would re-write the direct action statute to find that negligent misrepresentation, which is -- according to Claimants pleading -- concededly a fraud claim, is a negligence claim for purposes of the direct action statute only (while remaining a fraud claim for purposes of the statute of limitations and the discovery rule) borders on the absurd. There is simply no prospect for the Settlements without the Releases precisely because State Court Counsel will sue the Settling Insurers directly 2 based on these invented direct action claims. The Settling Insurers are not willing to make the substantial payment to the estate without the protections against the prospect of incurring significant legal expenses defending these actions. State Court Counsel s legal position on claims previously settled or dismissed with prejudice underscores the Settling Insurers justifiable concern that State Court Counsel will simply invent a new legal theory. The history of the litigation between the parties is replete with examples of new legal theories -- e.g., negligent supervision, fiduciary fraud, and negligent misrepresentation by nondisclosure. 3 2 The Settling Insurers insisted on the Releases contained in the Settlements to address the threats made by State Court Counsel to sue the Settling Insurers directly either a lawsuit based on the alleged conduct of the Archdiocese or a lawsuit based on the alleged conduct of an Additional Insured. To give effect to the Settlements, all potential lawsuits against the Settling Insurers and the Insurance Policies must be enjoined. If the Settlements terminated the Additional Insureds ability to seek coverage for certain claims, but they remained subject to lawsuits for those very same claims, there is no way the Additional Insureds would agree to give up their rights under the Insurance Policies. 3 The fact that State Court Counsel previously recognized that, absent evidence of fraud, a claim against the debtor was not enforceable, see Claimant A-75 and A-367 s Request for Withdrawal of Claims Without Prejudice (ECF Dkt No. 893), but now maintain that these are somehow viable claims -- notwithstanding the fact that (footnote continued) WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 7 of 10
8 The end result is that property of the estate remains subject to claims and that no party would ever agree to enter into such a settlement. IV. Approval of the Settlement is Not Prohibited by Law v. Siegel. In Law v. Siegel, the bankruptcy court ordered -- notwithstanding 522 of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides that, except in particular situations, exempt property is not liable for the payment of any prepetition debt or the payment of any administrative expense -- that certain of a debtor s exempt assets be used to pay administrative expenses, 134 S.Ct 1188, 1195 (2014). The Supreme Court addressed whether a bankruptcy court could override this express provision in the Bankruptcy Code either by using its inherent powers to sanction or the statutory authority under 105 of the Bankruptcy Code to issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Id. at 1194 The Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy court did not have authority -- whether inherent or from to override express provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Id. ( But in exercising those statutory and inherent powers, a bankruptcy court may not contravene specific statutory provisions. ). In this respect, Siegel, simply recognized and reinforced, the long-recognized axiom that a statute s general permission to take actions of a certain type must yield to a specific prohibition found elsewhere. Id. at It is not accidental that Siegel was unanimously decided. Siegel is not a groundbreaking decision. Siegel merely confirmed what has always been the law. Id. ( It is hornbook law that 105(a) does not allow the bankruptcy court to override explicit mandates of other sections of the there was no change in the underlying substantive law -- further underscores the point that, without the releases, State Court Counsel will continue to bring claims of dubious merit until each and every claim is disallowed by a final order from a court. See also Transcript of Hearing, January 24, 2013, pp The circumstances are exactly the same, the law has not changed, and State Court Counsel refuses to withdraw these claims. WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 8 of 10
9 Bankruptcy Code. ) (quoting 2 Collier on Bankruptcy [2], at (16th ed. 2013); Norwest Bank Worthington v. Ahlers, 485 U.S. 197, 206 (1988) ( [W]hatever equitable powers remain in the bankruptcy courts must and can only be exercised within the confines of the Bankruptcy Code. ); In re Kmart Corp., 359 F.3d 866, 871 (7th Cir. 2004) ( Section 105(a) allows a bankruptcy court to issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of the Code. This does not create discretion to set aside the Code s rules about property and distribution; the power conferred by 105(a) is one to implement rather than override. ); In re Fesco Plastics Corp., 996 F.2d 152, 154 (7th Cir. 1993) ( By the same token, when a specific Code section addresses an issue, a court may not employ its equitable powers to achieve a result not contemplated by the Code. ). Nothing in Siegel affects this Court s authority to grant the Releases because nothing in the Bankruptcy Code prohibits the Releases and because the Releases are necessary to give effect to the approval of the Settlements pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 and 363 of the Bankruptcy Code. In both Specialty Equipment and Airadigm, the Seventh Circuit recognized that nothing in the Bankruptcy Code prohibits the granting of third-party releases. In re Specialty Equip. Cos., Inc., 3 F.3d 1043, (7th Cir. 1993); In re Airadigm Commc ns., Inc., 519 F.3d 640, 656 (7th Cir. 2008); see also In re Ingersoll, Inc., 562 F.3d 856 (7th Cir. 2009) (recognizing that 11 U.S.C. 1123(b)(6) allows a court to include in a plan any other appropriate provision not inconsistent with the applicable provisions of [the bankruptcy code]. ) (quoting In re Airadigm, 519 F.3d at 657) (emphasis added). Thus, the issue in Siegel - - the use of a general provision of the Bankruptcy Code to override a more specific provision of the Bankruptcy Code -- does not arise in the context of the Releases. Unlike Siegel, where 105 was used to override a provision of the Bankruptcy Code, here the Releases are necessary to WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 9 of 10
10 give effect to the Settlements and sale of the Insurance Policies pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 and 363 of the Bankruptcy Code. Dated this 9th day of March, Respectfully submitted, ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE Debtor and Debtor in Possession By its counsel, Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek S.C. P.O ADDRESS: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1900 Milwaukee, Wisconsin Telephone: (414) Facsimile: (414) By: /s/ Francis H. LoCoco Daryl L. Diesing Bruce G. Arnold Francis H. LoCoco Lindsey M. Greenawald WHD/ Case svk Doc 3021 Filed 03/09/15 Page 10 of 10
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE, Debtor. Case No. 11-20059-svk Chapter 11 Hon. Susan V. Kelley MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO SHORTEN
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE, Debtor. Case No. 11-20059-svk Chapter 11 Hon. Susan V. Kelley BAKER TILLY VIRCHOW KRAUSE, LLP
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN BRETT DANIELS and BRETT DANIELS PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 15-CV-1334 SIMON PAINTER, TIMOTHY LAWSON, INTERNATIONAL SPECIAL ATTRACTIONS,
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: William L. Burnes Case No. 05-67697 Chapter 7 Debtor. / Hon. Phillip J. Shefferly Nancy E. Kunzat Plaintiff, v. Adv.
More informationCase grs Doc 24 Filed 10/02/14 Entered 10/02/14 11:56:43 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11
Document Page 1 of 11 IN RE: UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON DIVISION MATTHEW AND MEAGAN HOWLAND DEBTORS CASE NO. 12-51251 PHAEDRA SPRADLIN, TRUSTEE V. BEADS AND STEEDS
More information2:07-cv DCN Date Filed 02/20/2008 Entry Number 167 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
2:07-cv-00919-DCN Date Filed 02/20/2008 Entry Number 167 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Civil Action No.:07-cv-00919-DCN
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR ORDER LIFTING STAY INTRODUCTION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN, Chapter 9 Case no. 13-53846 Debtor. Hon. Steven W. Rhodes BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No
NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 17-3762 In re: ANN MILLER, Debtor GARY F. SEITZ, Trustee v. Ann Miller, Appellant On Appeal from the United States District Court
More information2:16-ap Doc#: 1 Filed: 10/06/16 Entered: 10/06/16 16:16:02 Page 1 of 17
2:16-ap-01097 Doc#: 1 Filed: 10/06/16 Entered: 10/06/16 16:16:02 Page 1 of 17 B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET (Instructions on Reverse) ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER (Court Use
More informationCase 4:11-cv Document 102 Filed in TXSD on 09/11/12 Page 1 of 8
Case 4:11-cv-02830 Document 102 Filed in TXSD on 09/11/12 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION V. Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Joseph v. Fresenius Health Partners Care Systems, Inc. Doc. 0 0 KENYA JOSEPH, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA Plaintiff, RENAL CARE GROUP, INC., d/b/a FRESENIUS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. No. 12 C 1856 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Fish v. Hennessy et al Doc. 161 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION WILLIAM A. FISH, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH J. HENNESSY, No. 12 C 1856 Magistrate Judge Mary M. Rowland
More informationDIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY BANKRUPTCY STAYS OF LITIGATION AGAINST NON-DEBTORS JUNE 12, 2003 JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN S IMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY BANKRUPTCY STAYS OF LITIGATION AGAINST NON-DEBTORS JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP JUNE 12, 2003 Most courts have held the insured versus insured exclusion
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DKT. NOS. 14, 21)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN JENNIFER MYERS, Case No. 15-cv-965-pp Plaintiff, v. AMERICOLLECT INC., and AURORA HEALTH CARE INC., Defendants. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS
More informationCase grs Doc 32 Filed 10/14/15 Entered 10/14/15 14:08:19 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10
Document Page 1 of 10 IN RE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LONDON DIVISION ESTON ARTHUR ELDRIDGE CASE NO. 15-60312 DEBTOR UNITED FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY V. ESTON ARTHUR ELDRIDGE
More informationBANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 19b0003p.06 BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE SIXTH CIRCUIT IN RE: EARL BENARD BLASINGAME; MARGARET GOOCH BLASINGAME, Debtors. CHURCH JOINT VENTURE, L.P.,
More informationCase: 3:16-cv wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/06/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Case: 3:16-cv-00468-wmc Document #: 3 Filed: 07/06/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: CAPITOL LAKES, INC., 1 Debtor. Case No. 16-cv-00468 MOTION TO
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DECISION AND ORDER
Triad Group Inc Doc. 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: TRIAD GROUP, Inc., TRIAD PHARMACEUTICALS, Inc., and H&P INDUSTRIES, Inc., Case Nos. 13-C-1307, 13-C-1308, 13-C-1389
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Before the Court is Twin City Fire Insurance Company s ( Twin City ) Motion for
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRADEN PARTNERS, LP, et al., v. Plaintiffs, TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-jst ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
More informationCase acs Doc 52 Filed 08/20/15 Entered 08/20/15 16:11:30 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Case 14-34747-acs Doc 52 Filed 08/20/15 Entered 08/20/15 16:11:30 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY In re: ) ) CLIFFORD J. AUSMUS ) CASE NO. 14-34747 ) CHAPTER 7
More informationCase jal Doc 19 Filed 10/16/17 Entered 10/16/17 14:15:06 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Case 16-10010-jal Doc 19 Filed 10/16/17 Entered 10/16/17 14:15:06 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY IN RE: MISTY S. LYNN CASE NO. 16-10010(1(7 Debtor(s MEMORANDUM-OPINION
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 549 U. S. (2007) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 05 996 ROBERT LOUIS MARRAMA, PETITIONER v. CITIZENS BANK OF MASSACHUSETTS ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP VIRGINIA. Norfolk Division. v. Civil Action No. 2:09cv322
Bluemark Inc. v. Geeks On Call Holdings, Inc. et al Doc. 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP VIRGINIA Norfolk Division BLUEMARK, INC., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 2:09cv322 GEEKS
More informationCase: 3:11-cv wmc Document #: 82 Filed: 06/20/12 Page 1 of 12
Case: 3:11-cv-00001-wmc Document #: 82 Filed: 06/20/12 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN BASHIR SHEIKH, M.D., v. Plaintiff, GRANT REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER,
More informationNOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAREN LEVIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:15-cv-07081-LLS Hon. Louis L. Stanton v. RESOURCE
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 16 Filed: 07/19/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:57
Case: 1:16-cv-02912 Document #: 16 Filed: 07/19/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:57 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COLIN COLLETTE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) )
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 25, 2011 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 25, 2011 Session BANCORPSOUTH BANK v. 51 CONCRETE, LLC & THOMPSON MACHINERY COMMERCE CORPORATION Appeal from the Chancery Court of Shelby County
More informationCase RLM-7A Doc 62 Filed 08/21/17 EOD 08/21/17 14:52:30 Pg 1 of 8 SO ORDERED: August 21, 2017.
Case 16-08403-RLM-7A Doc 62 Filed 08/21/17 EOD 08/21/17 14:52:30 Pg 1 of 8 SO ORDERED: August 21, 2017. Robyn L. Moberly United States Bankruptcy Judge UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationCase 2:08-cv JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 2:08-cv-04143-JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY THOMASON AUTO GROUP, LLC, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 08-4143
More informationNo. 107,763 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. SANFORD R. FYLER, Appellee, SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
No. 107,763 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS SANFORD R. FYLER, Appellee, v. BRUNDAGE-BONE CONCRETE PUMPING, INC., Appellant, SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. The primary purpose of the United States
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
American Trust & Savings Bank v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company et al Doc. 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationCase DHS Doc 13-4 Filed 01/30/13 Entered 01/30/13 15:19:17 Desc Memorandum of Law Page 1 of 13
Memorandum of Law Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY In Re: WENDY LUBETSKY, Chapter 7 Debtor. WENDY LUBETSKY, v. Plaintiff, Case No.: 12 30829 (DHS) Adv. No.: 12
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. Adv. Proc. No. COMPLAINT
Michael Fuller, Oregon Bar No. 09357 Special Counsel for Plaintiff michael@underdoglawyer.com UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON In re Julie A. Farrell, Debtor. Julie A. Farrell,
More informationOBJECTION OF UNITED STATES TRUSTEE TO FINAL APPLICATION OF HOWARD, SOLOCHEK & WEBER, S.C. FOR COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: ARCHDIOCESE OF MILWAUKEE Debtor. Case No. 11-20059-SVK (Chapter 11) OBJECTION OF UNITED STATES TRUSTEE TO FINAL APPLICATION OF HOWARD,
More informationCase Doc 271 Filed 12/19/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA DURHAM DIVISION
SO ORDERED. Case 18-80856 Doc 271 Filed 12/19/18 Page 1 of 5 SIGNED this 19th day of December, 2018. IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA DURHAM DIVISION In re: Chapter
More informationAndrew Walzer v. Muriel Siebert Co
2011 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-6-2011 Andrew Walzer v. Muriel Siebert Co Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 10-4526 Follow
More informationMEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case 3:05-cv-00287-GPM-CJP Document 90 Filed 08/25/2005 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS RONALD ALSUP, ROBERT CREWS, and MAGNUM PROPERTIES, L.L.C.,
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: City of Detroit, Michigan, Debtor. Bankruptcy Case No. 13-53846 Honorable Thomas J. Tucker Chapter 9 CITY OF DETROIT
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS EASTERN DIVISION
Document Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS EASTERN DIVISION In re JESSICA CURELOP MILLER, Debtor Chapter 7 Case No. 09 15324 FJB JESSICA CURELOP MILLER, Plaintiff v.
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN In re: MODERN PLASTICS CORPORATION, Debtor. / NEW PRODUCTS CORPORATION and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 09-00651 Hon. Scott W.
More informationCase 1:15-cv KBJ Document 16 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:15-cv-00875-KBJ Document 16 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATASHA DALLEY, Plaintiff, v. No. 15 cv-0875 (KBJ MITCHELL RUBENSTEIN & ASSOCIATES,
More informationORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on March 1, 2016.
Case 15-01424-JKO Doc 32 Filed 03/02/16 Page 1 of 6 ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on March 1, 2016. John K. Olson, Judge United States Bankruptcy Court UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN
More informationCase: 3:17-cv jdp Document #: 35 Filed: 06/01/18 Page 1 of 15
Case: 3:17-cv-00896-jdp Document #: 35 Filed: 06/01/18 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN JOHN SATRAN, v. Plaintiff, OPINION & ORDER LVNV FUNDING, LLC,
More informationv. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY September 18, 1998 TAZEWELL NATIONAL BANK
Present: All the Justices BILL GREEVER CORPORATION, ET AL. v. Record No. 972543 OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY September 18, 1998 TAZEWELL NATIONAL BANK FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TAZEWELL COUNTY
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DEREK GUBALA, Case No. 15-cv-1078-pp Plaintiff, v. TIME WARNER CABLE, INC., Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS
More informationCase 0:08-cv MGC Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2009 Page 1 of 7
Case 0:08-cv-61996-MGC Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2009 Page 1 of 7 EDWIN MORET, et al., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No.: 08-61996-CIV COOKE/BANDSTRA
More informationCase grs Doc 174 Filed 10/30/15 Entered 10/30/15 16:29:18 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 8
Document Page 1 of 8 IN RE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON DIVISION ARIANA ENERGY, LLC CASE NO. 14-51199 DEBTOR MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Master File No. 08 Civ
IN RE TREMONT SECURITIES LAW, STATE LAW AND INSURANCE LITIGATION Doc. 866 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE TREMONT SECURITIES LAW, STATE LAW, AND INSURANCE LITIGATION Master
More informationFollow this and additional works at:
2006 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 9-19-2006 In Re: Weinberg Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 05-2558 Follow this and additional
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Case: 11-13671-JMD Doc #: 514 Filed: 11/06/12 Desc: Main Document Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE In re: ) ) CHAPTER 11 KINGSBURY CORP. et al, ) Debtors
More informationCase 0:14-cv JIC Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:14-cv-62780-JIC Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/24/2015 Page 1 of 12 CHRISTOPHER BROPHY and TARA LEWIS, v. Appellants, SONIA SALKIN, as Chapter 7 Trustee for the Estate of the Debtor, UNITED
More informationCase mhm Document 1 1 Filed 02/28/2008 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 08-06092-mhm Document 1 1 Filed 02/28/2008 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION IN RE: JOHN WAYNE ATCHLEY and CASE NO. 05-79232-MHM ROBIN
More informationCase: 3:13-cv wmc Document #: 12 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 1 of 14
Case: 3:13-cv-00291-wmc Document #: 12 Filed: 07/30/13 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DUSTIN WEBER, v. Plaintiff, GREAT LAKES EDUCATIONAL LOAN SERVICES,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DEIRDRE RICHARDSON,
Richardson, Deirdre v. Helgerson, Adam et al Doc. 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DEIRDRE RICHARDSON, v. Plaintiff, ADAM HELGERSON and MONROE COUNTY, OPINION
More informationLLC, was removed to this Court from state court in December (Docket No. 1). At that
Leong v. The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Doc. 50 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X OEI HONG LEONG, Plaintiff,
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Shoup v. Gore, 2014 IL App (4th) 130911 Appellate Court Caption JOHN D. SHOUP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DANIEL W. GORE; DEBRA GORE, a/k/a DEBBIE S. GORE; AMEREN
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D August 17, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk H S STANLEY, JR, In his capacity as Trustee
More informationCase: , 02/14/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 73-1, Page 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-16480, 02/14/2017, ID: 10318773, DktEntry: 73-1, Page 1 of 6 (1 of 11) NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED FEB 14 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT
More informationCase KRH Doc 1 Filed 06/22/16 Entered 06/22/16 16:42:55 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6
Document Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division In re: Chapter 11 HEALTH DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY, INC., et al., Debtors. 8 Case No.: 15-32919-KRH
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ORDER AND REASONS
Kareem v. Markel Southwest Underwriters, Inc., et. al. Doc. 45 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA AMY KAREEM d/b/a JACKSON FASHION, LLC VERSUS MARKEL SOUTHWEST UNDERWRITERS, INC.
More informationThird Circuit Holds That Claims Are Disallowable Under Section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code No Matter Who Holds Them
CLIENT MEMORANDUM Third Circuit Holds That Claims Are Disallowable Under Section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code No November 22, 2013 AUTHORS Paul V. Shalhoub Marc Abrams In a recent opinion, the United
More informationZervos v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Dist. Court, D. Maryland In Re: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10)
Zervos v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Dist. Court, D. Maryland 2012 MEMORANDUM JAMES K. BREDAR, District Judge. CHRISTINE ZERVOS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Defendant. Civil No. 1:11-cv-03757-JKB.
More informationCase Document 3609 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/15 Page 1 of 17
Case 12-36187 Document 3609 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: ATP OIL & GAS CORPORATION CASE NO. 12-36187
More informationCase: jtg Doc #:596 Filed: 09/08/17 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.
Case:17-00612-jtg Doc #:596 Filed: 09/08/17 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN In re: MICHIGAN SPORTING GOODS DISTRIBUTORS, INC., Debtor. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
More informationSBLI - Third Party Releases. Kristopher M. Hansen, Matthew A. Garofalo and Sharon Choi 1. Introduction
SBLI - Third Party Releases Kristopher M. Hansen, Matthew A. Garofalo and Sharon Choi 1 Introduction One of the fundamental purposes of reorganization in bankruptcy is the debtor s ability to obtain a
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In re Estate of LEO G. CHARRON. SANDRA L. GUARA, as Personal Representative and Individually, SHERRY J. MARCO, DAVID B. CHARRON, and JOHN MICHAEL CHARRON, UNPUBLISHED
More informationCase 2:09-cv DPH-MJH Document 28 Filed 01/20/2010 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:09-cv-13505-DPH-MJH Document 28 Filed 01/20/2010 Page 1 of 14 IN RE: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION The Bankruptcy Court s Use of a Standardized Form
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 08 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re FITNESS HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL, INC., Debtor, SAM LESLIE, Chapter
More informationCase KRH Doc 1 Filed 06/22/16 Entered 06/22/16 17:28:53 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9
Document Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division In re: Chapter 11 HEALTH DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY, INC., et al., Debtors. 5 Case No.: 15-32919-KRH
More informationsmb Doc 290 Filed 01/18/19 Entered 01/18/19 10:45:17 Main Document Pg 1 of 6
Pg 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x : In re : Chapter 11 : WAYPOINT LEASING : Case No. 18-13648 (SMB)
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT WINCHESTER MEMORANDUM OPINION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT WINCHESTER DAVID HARRIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:14-CV-0046 ) Phillips/Lee TD AMERITRADE, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant
More informationJUDGMENT REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Division V Opinion by: JUDGE DAILEY Richman and Criswell*, JJ., concur
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No.: 07CA2163 Weld County District Court No. 06CV529 Honorable Daniel S. Maus, Judge Jack Steele and Danette Steele, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Katherine Allen
More informationIn Re: Ambrose Richardson, III
2012 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-17-2012 In Re: Ambrose Richardson, III Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 11-2112 Follow
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee) CASE NO. SC TFB No(s).: (18A) THE FLORIDA BAR S OBJECTION TO THE REPORT OF REFEREE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee) THE FLORIDA BAR, Petitioner, vs. CASE NO. SC10-1652 TFB No(s).: 20093037(18A) WILLIAM E. PACE, Respondent. THE FLORIDA BAR S OBJECTION TO THE REPORT OF
More informationApplication of the Automatic Stay to a Non-Debtor Corporation Joanna Matuza, J.D. Candidate 2017
Application c Stay to a Non-Debtor of the Automatic Corporation Stay to a Non-Debtor Corporation 2016 Volume VIII No. 20 Application of the Automatic Stay to a Non-Debtor Corporation Joanna Matuza, J.D.
More informationCase Doc 88 Filed 03/23/15 Entered 03/23/15 17:17:34 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 7
Document Page 1 of 7 In re: UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Paul R. Sagendorph, II Debtor Chapter 13 Case No. 14-41675-MSH BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE NATIONAL
More informationAdams v. Barr. Opinion. Supreme Court of Vermont February 2, 2018, Filed No
No Shepard s Signal As of: February 7, 2018 8:38 PM Z Adams v. Barr Supreme Court of Vermont February 2, 2018, Filed No. 17-224 Reporter 2018 VT 12 *; 2018 Vt. LEXIS 10 ** Lesley Adams, William Adams and
More informationCase 3:16-cv REP Document 734 Filed 12/19/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID# 19309
Case 3:16-cv-00545-REP Document 734 Filed 12/19/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID# 19309 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division f ~c ~920~ I~ CLERK. u.s.oisir1ctco'urr
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 2:16-cv-02814-JFB Document 9 Filed 02/27/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 223 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK N o 16-CV-2814 (JFB) RAYMOND A. TOWNSEND, Appellant, VERSUS GERALYN
More informationCase Doc 199 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 16:31:48 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 12
Document Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Charlotte Division) In re: ) ) Chapter 7 TSI HOLDINGS, LLC, et al. ) ) Case No. 17-30132 (Jointly
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. FILED: April 18, 2013
In the Matter of: SI RESTRUCTURING INCORPORATED, Debtor JOHN C. WOOLEY; JEFFREY J. WOOLEY, Appellants v. HAYNES & BOONE, L.L.P.; SAM COATS; PIKE POWERS; JOHN SHARP; SARAH WEDDINGTON; GARY M. CADENHEAD,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION MEMORANDUM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION LORRIE THOMPSON ) ) v. ) NO. 3-13-0817 ) JUDGE CAMPBELL AMERICAN MORTGAGE EXPRESS ) CORPORATION, et al. ) MEMORANDUM
More informationJudicial estoppel. - Slater v. U.S. Steel Corp., 871 F.3d 1174 (11th Cir. 2017)
ALABAMA BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY HODGEPODGE Bankruptcy at the Beach 2018 Commercial Panel Judge Henry Callaway Jennifer S. Morgan, Law Clerk to Judge Callaway Judicial estoppel - Slater v. U.S. Steel Corp.,
More informationCase GMB Doc 498 Filed 06/14/14 Entered 06/14/14 14:39:47 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11
Case 13-34483-GMB Doc 498 Filed 06/14/14 Entered 06/14/14 14:39:47 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Caption in compliance with D.N.J. LBR 9004-2(c)
More informationCase grs Doc 31 Filed 12/27/16 Entered 12/27/16 12:53:11 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 13
Document Page 1 of 13 IN RE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON DIVISION TROY L. VANWINKLE DEBTOR CASE NO. 16-50363 CHAPTER 7 LYLE WALKER and CARL DAVID CRAWFORD v. TROY
More informationCase: 4:15-cv RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183
Case: 4:15-cv-00464-RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION GRYPHON INVESTMENTS III, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No.
More informationCase MFW Doc 275 Filed 04/20/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Chapter 11.
Case 18-10601-MFW Doc 275 Filed 04/20/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re THE WEINSTEIN COMPANY HOLDINGS LLC, et al., 1 Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No.
More informationCase Doc 185 Filed 03/05/18 Entered 03/05/18 16:44:49 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10
Document Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Charlotte Division) In re: ) ) Chapter 11 TSI HOLDINGS, LLC, et al. ) ) Case No. 17-30132 (Jointly
More informationIn The Supreme Court of the United States
No. 14-481 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- NATIONAL HERITAGE
More informationCase 2:09-cv VBF-FFM Document 24 Filed 09/30/2009 Page 1 of 13
Case :0-cv-00-VBF-FFM Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of Los Angeles, California 00-0 0 Michael F. Perlis (State Bar No. 0 Email: mperlis@stroock.com Richard R. Johnson (State Bar No. Email: rjohnson@stroock.com
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:00-mc-00005-DPH Doc # 1380 Filed 02/08/18 Pg 1 of 9 Pg ID 22536 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: Settlement Facility Dow Corning Trust Case No. 00-CV-00005
More informationCase 4:16-cv ALM-CAN Document 55 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 412
Case 4:16-cv-00703-ALM-CAN Document 55 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 412 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION DALLAS LOCKETT AND MICHELLE LOCKETT,
More informationCase Doc 110 Filed 02/03/16 Entered 02/03/16 12:32:37 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA In re: Chapter 7 Paul Hansmeier, BKY 15-42460-KHS Debtor. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER At Minneapolis, Minnesota, February, 2016.
More informationCase 1:16-cv KPF Document 26 Filed 11/30/16 Page 1 of 11. : Plaintiff, : : Defendant.
Case 116-cv-02487-KPF Document 26 Filed 11/30/16 Page 1 of 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x SHIVA STEIN, Plaintiff, - against
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION www.flnb.uscourts.gov In re CYPRESS HEALTH SYSTEMS FLORIDA, INC., d/b/a TRI COUNTY HOSPITAL-WILLISTON, f/d/b/a NATURE COAST
More informationSession: The False Claims Act Post-Escobar. Authors: Robert L. Vogel and Andrew H. Miller THE ESCOBAR CASE: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION
Session: The False Claims Act Post-Escobar Authors: Robert L. Vogel and Andrew H. Miller THE ESCOBAR CASE: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION In United Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel.
More informationCase 2:05-cv WBS -GGH Document 225 Filed 03/31/11 Page 1 of 12. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo----
Case :0-cv-00-WBS -GGH Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 KRISTY SCHWARM, PATRICIA FORONDA, and JOSANN ANCELET, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Charlotte Division)
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Charlotte Division) In re: ) ) Chapter 7 TSI HOLDINGS, LLC, et al. ) ) Case No. 17-30132 (Jointly Administered) Debtors.
More informationCase 0:10-cv WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:10-cv-61985-WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GARDEN-AIRE VILLAGE SOUTH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC., a Florida
More informationCase: , 01/02/2018, ID: , DktEntry: 43-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Case: 16-55470, 01/02/2018, ID: 10708808, DktEntry: 43-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED JAN 02 2018 (1 of 14) MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT
More information