DOCSLIB.ORG

Interim Order

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 1 of 60 ORDERED. Dated: August 14, 2020 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION In re: Chapter 11 STEIN MART, INC. Case No. 3:20-bk-2387 STEIN MART BUYING CORP. Case No. 3:20-bk-2388 Case No. 3:20-bk-2389 STEIN MART HOLDING CORP., Joint Administration Requested Debtors. INTERIM ORDER (I) AUTHORIZING THE DEBTORS TO ASSUME THE CONSULTING AGREEMENT, (II) APPROVING PROCEDURES FOR STORE CLOSING SALES, AND (III) APPROVING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CUSTOMARY STORE BONUS PROGRAM AND PAYMENTS TO NON-INSIDERS THEREUNDER THIS CASE came on for consideration upon the motion (the “Motion”)1 (Doc. No. 19) of Stein Mart, Inc. (“SM”), Stein Mart Buying Corp. (“SMB”) and Stein Mart Holding Corp. (“SMHC” and together with SM and SMB, the “Debtors” or the “Company”), as Debtors and Debtors-in-Possession in the above-captioned chapter 11 cases pursuant to sections 105, 363, 365, and 554 of the title 11 of the United States Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101–1532 (the “Bankruptcy Code”) and Rules 2002, 6003, and 6004 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, for entry 1 Capitalized terms not otherwise herein defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Motion. 4822-7491-8342.3 6238466.5 Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 2 of 60 of an order (this “Interim Order”) (a) authorizing the Debtors to assume the Consulting Agreement; (b) authorizing and approving the continuation or initiation of the Sales and Store Closings at the Stores in accordance with the terms of the Consulting Agreement and the Store Closing Procedures, with such Sales to be free and clear of all liens, claims, and encumbrances; (c) approving the Dispute Resolution Procedures described herein to resolve any disputes with governmental units regarding certain applicable non-bankruptcy laws that regulate liquidation and similar-themed sales; (d) approving the implementation of the Store Bonus Program and authorizing payments thereunder to certain non-insider Store employees; (e) scheduling a final hearing to consider approval of the Motion on a final basis; and (f) granting related relief all as more fully set forth in the Motion; and upon the First Day Declaration; and this Court having jurisdiction over the Motion and the relief requested therein in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(a)-(b) and 1334(b) and the Order In re: Standing Order Reference of Cases Arising under Title 11, United States Code, entered February 22, 2012, by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida; and consideration of the Motion and the relief requested therein being a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and notice of the Motion having been given as provided in the Motion, and such notice having been adequate and appropriate under the circumstances; and it appearing that no other or further notice of the Motion need be provided; and the Court having held a hearing on August 14, 2020 to consider the interim relief requested in the Motion (the “Hearing”); and upon the record of the Hearing and all of the proceedings had before the Court; and the Court having found and determined that the relief sought in the Motion and granted herein is necessary to avoid immediate and irreparable harm to the Debtors and their estates as contemplated by Bankruptcy Rule 6003, is in the best interests of the Debtors, their respective 2 4822-7491-8342.3 6238466.5 Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 3 of 60 estates and creditors, and all parties-in-interest, and provides a net benefit to the Debtors and their estates, and that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Motion and at the Hearing establish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had before this Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor IT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:2 A. The Debtors have advanced sound business reasons for assuming the Consulting Agreement and adopting the Store Closing Procedures, on an interim basis subject to the Final Hearing (defined below), as set forth in the Motion and at the Hearing, and assuming the Consulting Agreement is a reasonable exercise of the Debtors’ business judgment and in the best interests of the Debtors and their estates. B. The Consulting Agreement, a copy of which is attached to this Interim Order as Exhibit 1, was negotiated, proposed, and entered into by the Consultant and the Debtors without collusion, in good faith, and from arm’s length bargaining positions. C. The Store Closing Procedures, which are attached hereto as Exhibit 2, are reasonable and appropriate, and the conduct of the Sales and Store Closings in accordance with the Store Closing Procedures will provide an efficient means for the Debtors to liquidate and dispose of the Store Closure Assets as quickly and effectively as possible, will maximize the returns on the Store Closure Assets, and are in the best interest of the Debtors’ estates. D. The assumption of the Consulting Agreement is a sound exercise of the Debtors’ business judgment. 2 Findings of fact shall be construed as conclusions of law and conclusions of law shall be construed as findings of fact where appropriate. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052. 3 4822-7491-8342.3 6238466.5 Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 4 of 60 E. The relief set forth herein is necessary to avoid immediate and irreparable harm to the Debtors and their estates and the Debtors have demonstrated good, sufficient, and sound business purposes and justifications for the relief approved herein. F. The Store Closings and Sales are in the best interest of the Debtors’ estates. G. The Dispute Resolution Procedures are fair and reasonable and comply with applicable law. H. The Debtors have represented that they are neither selling nor leasing personally identifiable information pursuant to the relief requested in the Motion, although the Consultant will be authorized to distribute emails and promotional materials to the Debtors’ customers consistent with the Debtors’ existing policies on the use of consumer information. I. The entry of this Interim Order is in the best interests of the Debtors and their estates and creditors as well as all other parties-in-interest herein; and now therefore it is hereby ORDERED: 1. The Motion is GRANTED on an interim basis. 2. The final hearing (the “Final Hearing”) on the Motion shall be held on September 11, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. (Eastern Time) and any objections or responses to entry of a Final Order on the Motion shall be in writing, filed with the Court, with a copy to chambers, and served upon (i) the proposed attorneys for the Debtors, Foley & Lardner, LLP; (ii) the Office of the United States Trustee for Region 21, George C. Young Federal Building, 400 West Washington Street, Suite 1100 Orlando, Florida 32801; (iii) counsel for the administrative agent under the Debtors’ pre-petition revolving credit facility, Well Fargo Bank, N.A., c/o (a) Otterbourg P.C. (Attn: Daniel F. Fiorillo, Esq. and Chad B. Simon, Esq.), 230 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10169-0075, and (b) Smith, Hulsey & Busey, One Independent Drive, Suite 4 4822-7491-8342.3 6238466.5 Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 5 of 60 3300, Jacksonville, Florida 32202 (Attn: Stephen D. Busey); (iv) counsel for the administrative agent under the Debtors’ pre-petition term loan, Gordon Brothers Finance Company LLC, c/o (a) Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, One Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02110, Attn: Matthew F. Furlong, Julia Frost-Davies and Christopher L. Carter, and (b) Holland & Knight LLP, 50 North Laura Street, Suite 3900, Jacksonville, Florida 32202, Attn: Alan M. Weiss; (v) counsel for the Consultant c/o (a) Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, 1313 N. Market St., Suite 5100, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, Attn: Douglas D. Herrmann and Marcy J. McLaughlin Smith, and (b) Quarles & Brady LLP, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 3400, Tampa, Florida 33602, Attn: Philip Martino; and (vi) the landlords at any Store(s) affected by such objection, in each case so as to be received no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Final Hearing. In the event no objections to entry of the Final Order on the Motion are timely received, this Court may enter such Final Order without need for the Final Hearing. 3. The Debtors and the Consultant are authorized and empowered to take any and all further actions as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to give effect to this Interim Order. The failure to specifically include any particular provision of the Consulting Agreement in this Interim Order shall not diminish or impair the effectiveness of such provisions, it being the intent of this Court that the Consulting Agreement and all of its provisions, payments, and transactions, be and hereby are authorized and approved as and to the extent provided for in this Interim Order. 4. Subject to paragraph 15 and 24 of this Interim Order, to the extent of any conflict between this Interim Order, the Store Closing Procedures, and the Consulting Agreement, the terms of this Interim Order shall control over all other documents and the Store Closing Procedures shall control over the Consulting Agreement. 5 4822-7491-8342.3 6238466.5 Case 3:20-bk-02387-JAF Doc 102 Filed 08/14/20 Page 6 of 60 5.
Recommended publications
  • 1 United States District Court Northern District Of

    1 United States District Court Northern District Of

    Case: 1:08-cv-05098 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/18/09 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:<pageID> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ARLINGTON HOSPITALITY, INC., et al., Appellants/Cross-Appellees, No. 08 C 5098 v. Judge James B. Zagel ARLINGTON LF, LLC, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Introduction This case is on appeal to this Court for the second time. Arlington Hospitality (“Debtor”) filed for bankruptcy and entered into a debtor-in-possession (“DIP”) financing agreement with Arlington LF (“LF”). The Bankruptcy Court entered an Interim Order approving the DIP agreement. Under the Interim Order, Debtor was required to pay certain fees immediately, which it did not do. After approximately one month, LF refused to continue lending money to Debtor. After a trial, the Bankruptcy Court found that LF anticipatorily repudiated the agreement. LF appealed to this Court, which reversed and remanded, finding that Debtor repudiated the agreement shortly after the Interim Order was promulgated because Debtor neglected to pay the fees which were due. On remand, Debtor made several new arguments that LF in fact repudiated first. The Bankruptcy Court, considering itself bound by my prior ruling, found again for LF. The Bankruptcy Court also awarded LF a portion of certain fees and default interest for which LF had motioned. Debtor now appeals the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling and LF cross-appeals the amount of the fee award. For the following reasons, I reverse the decision by the Bankruptcy 1 Case: 1:08-cv-05098 Document #: 31 Filed: 09/18/09 Page 2 of 14 PageID #:<pageID> Court on remand and find that in light of Debtor’s new arguments, LF did in fact anticipatorily breach the agreement, and therefore LF is not entitled to any fees or default interest.
  • How Do Interim Intervention Orders Work?

    How Do Interim Intervention Orders Work?

    Breaches of the interim order Tips for safety If the Respondent makes prohibited contact with you Change the locks and install new deadlocks, Family Violence after the order has been served, you should contact security doors, window locks, alarms and sensor Intervention Orders your local police station to report the breach. Record 1 lights. the names of any police officers you speak with. Financial assistance to make your home safer may You should write down and keep the dates, times and be available from the Victims of Crime Assistance HOW DO INTERIM other details of the breaches. Tribunal (VOCAT). Speak to your lawyer or the INTERVENTION ORDERS Court’s Applicant Practitioner about VOCAT. Police will only charge the Respondent for a breach if they think that there is evidence which proves ‘beyond WORK? Turn off location settings in your mobile phone reasonable doubt’ that the breach happened. and keep the phone charged. Can I get immediate Photos of damage and/or injuries, names of witnesses Consider buying a pre-paid mobile so the and medical reports are useful. Keep copies of texts, Respondent doesn’t know your number. If you protection from the emails and Facebook messages. drive, keep petrol in your car. Court system? In circumstances where it is your word against the Keep important documents in a safe place outside Respondent’s, it is helpful to police if you can the family home. remember details such as what the Respondent was wearing when you saw him or her, what sort of car he Carry a copy of the interim or final intervention or she was driving, its registration number etc.
  • Provisionally Permanent? Keeping Temporary Custody Orders Temporary Under the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction

    Provisionally Permanent? Keeping Temporary Custody Orders Temporary Under the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction

    COMMENTS PROVISIONALLY PERMANENT? KEEPING TEMPORARY CUSTODY ORDERS TEMPORARY UNDER THE HAGUE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION CHRISTINE T. Di GUGLIELMOt INTRODUCTION In 1980, the Hague Conference on Private International Law' cre- ated the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction2 (Convention) as an attempt to supply parents with a legal tool to assist them in achieving the return of children removed across international boundaries without consent of the left-behind parents. " The Convention has been in force in the United States for t A.B. 1997, Brown University;J.D. Candidate 2003, University of Pennsylvania. I would like to acknowledge Stephen J.Cullen for introducing me to the Shealy case and Professor Harry Reicher for his helpful feedback. Special thanks to Matthew Di Gugli- elmo; Henry and Terri Walters; Stephanie Walters; and Jim and Francesca Di Guglielmo for their love and encouragement. Finally, I thank the editors of Volume 151 of the University of PennsylvaniaLaw Review for their dedication and diligence. 'The 1980 Hague Conference consisted of twenty-seven member states, three participating states, three international governmental organizations, and three nongovernmental organizations. See Procks-verbaux et Documents de travail de la Premi're commission, in 3 HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW, ACRES ET DOCUMENTS DE LA QUATORZItME SESSION, ENLEVEMENT D'ENFANTS [ACTs AND DOCUMENTS OF THE FOURTEENTH SESSION, CHILD ABDUCTION] 253, 253-55 (1982) (listing the members of the First Commission of the Hague Conference on Private In- ternational Law). 2 Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980, T.I.A.S.
  • Strengthening Interim Measures in International Arbitration

    Strengthening Interim Measures in International Arbitration

    NOTES STRENGTHENING INTERIM MEASURES IN INTER- NATIONAL ARBITRATION STEPHEN BENZ* ABSTRACT Interim measures are playing an increasingly important role in the interna- tional arbitration system. However, interim measures are plagued by two inter- related problems. First, this Note analyzes institutional rules and published arbitral case law to show that some arbitral tribunals have established lower standards for issuing interim measures relative to national courts. Second, this Note analyzes the national courts of the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom to show the discordance among national courts in the enforce- ment of interim measures issued by a tribunal. This paper highlights the inter- related nature of these two problems, and proposes an international convention that harmonizes the enforcement of interim measures, while at the same time raising the standard necessary to issue interim measures. I. INTRODUCTION .................................... 144 II. INSTITUTIONAL RULES ON INTERIM MEASURES . 148 A. The ICC 2012 Arbitration Rules .................... 148 B. ICSID Arbitration Rules .......................... 149 C. LCIA Arbitration Rules .......................... 150 D. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. ..................... 150 III. PUTTING MEAT ON THE BONES: EXAMINING THE FIVE FACTORS FOR ISSUING INTERIM MEASURES. ........................... 151 A. Factor 1: A Prima Facie Showing of Jurisdiction: The Case of Pey Casado v. Chile ............................. 152 B. Factor 2: A Prima Facie Showing of Merit as Shown in ICC Case No. 10596. ............................... 154 C. Factor 3: Irreparable Harm or Merely Harm? An Examination of Paushok v. Mongolia . 156 D. Factor 4: Proportionality of the Interim Measure . 162 E. Factor 5: Urgency as Shown in Railroad Development Corp v. Guatemala ................................... 163 F. A Proposal for Reform: The Need to Raise the Standards .
  • CIVIL EVENT HISTORY CODES AFDV Affidavit Judgment Entered AMND Claim Amended ANUM Accession Number APDS Appeal Dismissed APPL Ap

    CIVIL EVENT HISTORY CODES AFDV Affidavit Judgment Entered AMND Claim Amended ANUM Accession Number APDS Appeal Dismissed APPL Ap

    CIVIL EVENT HISTORY CODES AFDV Affidavit Judgment Entered AMND Claim Amended ANUM Accession Number APDS Appeal Dismissed APPL Appeal to Circuit Court ASGN Assignment of Judgment BADC Bad Check Received BANK Bankruptcy Entered BATC Check Batch Number BNKR Bankruptcy Removed BODY Body Attachment BONF Bond Forfeiture Judgment Recorded BRCL Recall Body Attachment BUSR Introduction of Business Records CABJ Lien of ABJ sent to Circuit Ct. CCAR Appeal Returned from Circuit Ct. CCHG Case Change CCLN Circuit Court Lien Recording Fee CDEL Complaint Delete CERT Request or Certification CFAS Confession of Assets Received CLOJ Lien of Judgment Sent to Circuit Ct. CNSL Consolidated Cases COMM Comment COND Condemnation-Immediate Possession and Title Order CSNT Consent Judgment Entered DAFJ Affidavit Judgment Entered DEFN Intention to Defend Filed DFLT Judgment in Default Entered DPSD Defendant present, Plaintiff not present, Show cause dismissed. DSML General Dismissal DSM6 Dismissal (3-506) Entered DSM7 Dismissal (3-507) Entered DVAP Domestic Violence Appeal Filed DVCC Records Sent to CC/Petition to Modify DV Order Filed DVEX Domestic Violence Ex Parte DVIO Domestic Violence Interim Order DVPM Domestic Violence Petition to Modify DVPO Domestic Violence Protective Order DVPR Domestic Violence Petition to Rescind DVSC Domestic Violence Show Cause EARN Earnings Withholding Order Issued EEPT Emergency Evaluee Transported EEPU Emergency Evaluee Not Located FILN Initial Case Filing FRGN Recording of Foreign Judgment GRPT Garnishee Report of Employment Received
  • Maintenance and Custody Act

    Maintenance and Custody Act

    Maintenance and Custody Act CHAPTER 160 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, 1989 as amended by 1990, c. 5, s. 107; 1994-95, c. 6, s. 63; 1997 (2nd Sess.), c. 3; 1998, c. 12, s. 2; 2000, c. 29, ss. 2-8; 2012, cc. 7, 25 © 2013 Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Nova Scotia Published by Authority of the Speaker of the House of Assembly Halifax This page is intentionally blank. CHAPTER 160 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, 1989 amended 1990, c. 5, s. 107; 1994-95, c. 6, s. 63; 1997 (2nd Sess.), c. 3; 1998, c. 12, s. 2; 2000, c. 29, ss. 2-8; 2012, cc. 7, 25 An Act Respecting the Maintenance of Spouses, Common-law Partners and Dependants title amended 2000, c. 29, s. 2 Table of Contents (The table of contents is not part of the statute) Section Short title........................................................................................................................................... 1 Interpretation..................................................................................................................................... 2 Court order ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Priority .............................................................................................................................................. 3A Factors considered............................................................................................................................. 4 Obligation of maintained spouse or partner......................................................................................5
  • Reportable in the Supreme Court of India Civil

    Reportable in the Supreme Court of India Civil

    REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.1429-1430/2020 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 13703-13704 of 2019) BENEDICT DENIS KINNY ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS TULIP BRIAN MIRANDA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1431/2020 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 19732 of 2019) SMT. PRACHI PRASAD PARAB ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. The question which has arisen in these appeals is as to whether the High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction conferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India can pass an order interdicting a legal fiction engrafted in a State enactment. 1 2. These two appeals have been filed against common judgment dated 02.04.2019 passed in Writ Petitions filed by the contesting respondent. Order dated 02.05.2019 in Review Petition No. 20 of 2019 filed in Writ Petition No.3673 of 2018 has also been challenged. 3. Brief facts giving rise to these appeals are: - A. Civil Appeal NoS.1429-1430/2020 Benedict Denis Kinny versus Tulip Brian Miranda & ors. i) The respondent as well as appellant contested the election on the seat of Counsellor in Mumbai Municipal Corporation reserved for Backward class citizens. On 23.02.2017, the respondent No.1 was declared elected. Section 5B of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act required the candidate to submit caste validity certificate on the date of filing Nomination paper. A candidate who has applied to Scrutiny Committee for the verification of his caste certificate before date of filing Nomination but who had not received the validity certificate on the date of filing 2 Nomination has to submit an undertaking that he shall submit within a period of six months from the date of election, the validity certificate issued by the Scrutiny Committee.
  • A Guide to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

    A Guide to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

    Environment Environnement Canada Canada A Guide to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 MARCH 2000 Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Main entry under title : A guide to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 Text in English and French on inverted pages. Title on added t.p.: Guide sur la Loi canadienne sur la protection de l'environnement, 1999. Issued also on the Internet. ISBN 0-662-64825-0 Cat. no. En21-199/1999 1. Environmental law – Canada. 2. Pollution – Law and legislation – Canada. 3. Environmental protection – Canada. I. Canada. Environment Canada. KE3613.5G84 2000 344.71'046 C00-980127-8 D I S C L A I M E R This document has been prepared for convenience of reference only, and has no official sanction. Official or more detailed information can be found in the legal text of CEPA 1999, available on Environment Canada’s Green Lane at: http://www.ec.gc.ca/cepa © Minister of Public Works and Government Services 2000 A Guide to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 March 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1 PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................1 ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES (SECTION 2) ....................................................................1 DEFINITIONS (SECTION 3) ........................................................................................2 PART 1: ADMINISTRATION (SECTIONS 6 - 10)..........................................................3
  • MOTION for an INTERIM ORDER: DOMESTIC RELATIONS an Informational Guide to a North Dakota State Civil Court Process

    MOTION for an INTERIM ORDER: DOMESTIC RELATIONS an Informational Guide to a North Dakota State Civil Court Process

    MOTION FOR AN INTERIM ORDER: DOMESTIC RELATIONS An Informational Guide to a North Dakota State Civil Court Process The North Dakota Legal Self Help Center provides resources to people who represent themselves in civil matters in the North Dakota state courts. The information provided in this informational guide is not intended for legal advice but only as a general guide to a civil court process. If you decide to represent yourself, you will need to do additional research to prepare. When you represent yourself, you must abide by the following: • State or federal laws that apply to your case; • Case law, also called court opinions, that applies to your case; and • Court rules that apply to your case, which may include: o North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure; o North Dakota Rules of Court; o North Dakota Rules of Evidence; o North Dakota Administrative Rules and Orders; o Any local court rules. Links to the laws, case law, and court rules can be found at ndcourts.gov. A glossary with definitions of legal terms is available at ndcourts.gov/legal-self-help/glossary. When you represent yourself, you are held to the same requirements and responsibilities as a lawyer, even if you don’t understand the rules or procedures. If you are unsure if this information suits your circumstances, consult a lawyer. This information is not a complete statement of the law. This covers basic information about the process of making and answering a motion for an interim order in a North Dakota state district court domestic relations case. The Center is not responsible for any consequences that may result from the information provided.
  • CODE of CIVIL PROCEDURE CS(OS) 911/2007 Reserved on : 15Th January, 2013

    CODE of CIVIL PROCEDURE CS(OS) 911/2007 Reserved on : 15Th January, 2013

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CS(OS) 911/2007 Reserved on : 15th January, 2013. Date of Decision: 24th January, 2013. SANJAY SHARMA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Arun Khosla with Ms. Shreeanka Kakkar, Advocates versus AJAY SHARMA AND ORS. ..... Defendants Through Mr. Akhil Sibal with Mr. Narhari Singh, Mr. Rajat Sehgal, Mr Jatin Mongia and Mr. Amit Agrawal, Advocates for D-7/Applicant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J : I.A. 12964/2012 IN CS(OS) 911/2007 1. Present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC by the defendant no. 7 seeking compensation from the plaintiff by way of restitution in the amount of Rs. 84,000/- per month for the period starting from 22nd May, 2007 till 8th December, 2011. 2. The relevant facts of the present case are that on 15th May, 2007, the plaintiff filed the present suit for partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction along with an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC being I.A. No. 5867/2007 for temporary injunction, alleging that various properties, including Shop No. G-4/17, CC, Gulmohar Park, were ancestral/HUF properties in the hands of the plaintiff’s late father. 3. This Court passed an ex parte ad-interim order dated 22nd May, 2007 directing the defendants to maintain status quo in respect of possession and title of the suit property. 4. On 21st May, 2008, defendant no. 7/applicant, wife of defendant no. 1, Mr.
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 in the United States District Court for the Eastern Distric

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 in the United States District Court for the Eastern Distric

    Case 2:11-mc-00064-LKK-KJN Document 30 Filed 01/18/12 Page 1 of 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 11 Plaintiff, No. 2:11-mc-00064 LKK KJN 12 v. 13 PATRICIA K. THOMAS, 14 Defendant and Judgment Debtor. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 15 / 16 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s amended application for a writ of 17 continuing garnishment (“Application”), seeking the garnishment of “at least” 70 percent of 18 defendant’s disposable earnings in furtherance of the payment of a criminal restitution balance of 19 $1,860,660.43, calculated as of October 3, 2011 (Dkt. Nos. 3, 14).1 The court heard this matter 20 on its law and motion calendar on November 10, 2011, entered an interim order at defendant’s 21 suggestion, and permitted the parties to file supplemental briefing regarding the Application in 22 light of defendant’s recent retention of counsel. (See Order, Nov. 14, 2011, Dkt. No. 18.) The 23 parties filed supplemental briefs (Dkt. Nos. 20-21, 25). Although defendant filed her brief nearly 24 25 1 This case proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(7) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The related criminal action is United States v. Thomas, 26 2:02-cr-00152 LKK-1 (E.D. Cal.). (Related Case Order, Dkt. No. 4.) 1 Case 2:11-mc-00064-LKK-KJN Document 30 Filed 01/18/12 Page 2 of 21 1 one week late (see Order to Show Cause, Dec.
  • Interim Measures in International Law, with Special Reference to the European System for the Protection of Human Rights

    Interim Measures in International Law, with Special Reference to the European System for the Protection of Human Rights

    Interim Measures in International Law, with Special Reference to the European System for the Protection of Human Rights R. St. J. Macdonald&apos; In the Case of Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden (Cruz Varas) two the Court of Human major questions were put before European RightS2. of of the The first related to the scope and interpretation Art. 3 European and inhuman Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture or concerned the degrading treatment or punishment. The second question of the failure of the Swedish government to comply with the indication the European Commission of Human Rights to refrain from expelling be reviewed applicant from Sweden to Chile before his application could by the Commission. While the issues relating to the Court&apos;s decision the human under Art. 3 are naturally of strong interest to rights lawyer, the of the present discussion will focus more specifically on question in- terim measures: what is the force and effect of indications by the Com- mission of interim measures? of the The question of the scope of the interim measures power organs established by the European Convention on Human Rights has an impor- tant impact on the degree to which the guaranteed rights can effectively State would be protected. In Soering it was determined that a Contracting violate Art. 3 of the Convention if that state were to extradite an indi- 1 Professor of International Law, University of Toronto; judge at the European Court Uni- of Human Rights, Strasbourg; Honorary Professor in the Law Department, Peking with well versity, Beijing; Membre de Nnstitut.