Home / are more white girls dating black guys / Is continental casualty liquidating 2016

Is continental casualty liquidating 2016

(lb) Certificate of Service for Joinder of Asbestos Plaintiffs of Goldberg, Persky & White, P.


H-15-03073 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SIM LAKE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses appeals brought by UPD Global Resources, Inc. The Bankruptcy Case UPD was the debtor in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filed on August 15, 2011, Case No.

On May 12, 2015, the Bankruptcy Court signed the first of the three orders from which UPD appeals, i.e., the Order dismissing the Adversary Proceeding which stated only: "Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED." On May 29, 2015, the defendants in UPD's state court malpractice suit filed an amended motion for summary judgment arguing that in light of the Satisfaction of Judgment, which Continental filed in the Federal District Court, there were no damages and that absent damages, UPD's malpractice case could not be sustained. , UPD's confirmed Plan and pleadings from the malpractice suit that UPD is pursuing in state court against the attorneys who represented UPD in the breach of contract suit that resulted in a , 670, 534.77 judgment and allowed claim in UPD's Bankruptcy Case, Continental's motion to dismiss constitutes a factual attack on the Bankruptcy Court's jurisdiction, and the Bankruptcy Court's review was not limited to whether the first amended complaint filed in the Adversary Proceeding sufficiently alleged jurisdiction. §§ 157(c)(1) and 1334(b) regardless of whether the matter at issue arises before or after confirmation of a plan. § 1334(b) federal district courts have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of all civil proceedings arising under or arising in or related to cases under title 11. § 541, and (2) suits between third parties that have an effect on the bankruptcy estate." , 266 F.3d 388, 390 (5th Cir.

The defendants in UPD's malpractice suit were insured under a policy issued by-Continental ., No. conduct calculated to thwart UPD's implementation of its plan of reorganization when [Continental's] predecessor in interest endorsed the prosecution of a legal malpractice suit as a means of implementing its plan.

H-15-03073: • Order granting Motion of Continental Casualty Company ("Continental" or "Appellee") pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 3 006 to withdraw Claim No. From, and after the Effective Date, the Chief Restructuring Officer may settle and compromise Claims with continued supervision of the Bankruptcy Court. Except as otherwise expressly provided in the Plan, all entities who have held, hold or may hold Claims against, or Interest in, the Debtor's Bankruptcy Estate or the Debtor will be permanently enjoined, on and after the Consummation Date, from (i) commencing or continuing in any manner any action or other proceeding of any kind with respect to any such Claim, (ii) the enforcement, attachment, collection or recovery by any manner or means of any judgment, award, decree or order against the Debtor or the Debtor's Bankruptcy Estate, (iii) creating, perfecting or enforcing any encumbrance of any kind against the Debtor or the Debtor's Bankruptcy Estate on account of any such Claim and (iv) asserting any right of setoff, subrogation or recoupment of any kind against any obligation due from the Debtor or the Debtor's Bankruptcy Estate on account of any such claim; provided, however, notwithstanding any provision of the Plan to the contrary, each holder of a Claim shall be entitled to enforce his, her or its rights under the Plan and Plan Documents. UPD's Malpractice Action, UPD's Adversary Action, and Continental's Motion to Withdraw Proof of Claim in UPD's Bankruptcy Case Before confirmation of UPD's Plan, UPD commenced a legal malpractice case against the attorneys who represented UPD in the breach of contract suit that resulted in PBC's summary judgment and claim against UPD for , 670, 534.77. Standards of Review The Bankrutpcy Court's decisions to dismiss the adversary case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b) (1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and/or Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim are legal decisions subject to UPD argues that the Bankruptcy Court had post-confirmation subject matter jurisdiction over the claims that it asserted in the Adversary Proceeding because those claims are rooted in acts that interfered with the implementation of UPD's confirmed Plan.

ENTWISTLE & CAPPUCCI LLP, Attorneys for Teachers' Retirement System of the State of Illinois and TCW Illinois State Board of Investments, 299 Park Avenue, 20th Floor, New York, N.

WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ, Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Claim Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.

("UPD" or "Debtor") from one order entered in Bankruptcy Case No. H-11-36970-H5-11 (the "Bankruptcy Case") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division ("Bankruptcy Court"). ("PBC") submitted a proof of claim for , 670, 543.77, representing the full value of a summary judgment received in the civil action styled, This is a liquidating plan, and the Debtor has no plans to operate after Confirmation of the Plan.

ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, CONTINENTAL CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, NAVIGATORS INSURANCE COMPANY, RSUI INDEMNITY COMPANY, AND BERKLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs, v. Plaintiffs Arch Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Continental Casualty Insurance Company, Navigators Insurance Company, RSUI Indemnity Company, and Berkley Insurance Company (collectively, "Insurers") are six excess insurance carriers. Murdock, the "Individual Defendants"), Dole Food Company, Inc. The Insurers seek a declaration that they do not have to fund an underlying settlement due to Defendants' alleged fraud.

MICHAEL CARTER, DOLE FOOD COMPANY, INC., and DFC HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendants. Pasich, Esquire , Pamela Wood, Esquire , Liner LLP, Los Angeles, California, Mikaela Whitman, Esquire , Liner LLP, New York, New York. This breach of contract case is assigned to the Complex Commercial Litigation Division of this Court.

THE ORDER (DK #27) IS HEREBY CLARIFIED that Continental Casualty Company's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, thereby dismissing PBC Services, Inc. On August 27, 2015, UPD timely filed a Notice of Appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's May 12, 2015, Order dismissing the Adversary Proceeding, and the August 13, 2015, Order clarifying and modifying the Order dismissing the Adversary Proceeding, thereby initiating Civil Action No. On this day, the Court held a hearing on the Motion of Continental Casualty Company (Docket No. (2) Bankruptcy Jurisdiction Bankruptcy jurisdiction is governed by 28 U. Section 157(c) (1) provides: "A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that is not a core proceeding but that is otherwise related to a case under title 11." Under 28 U. "Proceedings 'related to' a bankruptcy include (1) causes of action owned by the debtor that become property of the estate pursuant to 11 U. 2001), the Fifth Circuit held that "[a]fter a debtor's reorganization plan has been confirmed, the debtor's estate, and thus bankruptcy jurisdiction, ceases to exist, other than for matters pertaining to the implementation or execution of the plan." , 301 F.3d at 305, the Fifth Circuit held that post-confirmation jurisdiction existed over a dispute between the debtor's suppliers and the debtor's insurance company upon concluding that "the proceeding will certainly impact compliance with or completion of the reorganization plan." In that post-confirmation bankrutpcy jurisdiction did not exist because the matters at issue did not pertain to the implementation or execution of the confirmed plan.

Maryland Casualty Company, Defendants (14-50867) -- Opinion and Order Granting, in part, and Denying, in part, Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment FBI WIND DOWN, INC. re property damage claim In re: Quantum Foods, LLC, et al, Case No. 16-50045 -- Memorandum Opinion and Order relating to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, or alternatively, Requiring a More Definite Statement and the Motion of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors to Strike the Notice of Supplemental Authority..


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *