Case 3:06-cv Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Similar documents
Case 4:11-cv Document 75 Filed in TXSD on 05/31/12 Page 1 of 9

Case 1:10-cv FAM Document 80 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2012 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Case 2:12-cv BSJ Document 772 Filed 09/30/14 Page 1 of 14

Case 8:16-cv CJC-DFM Document 281 Filed 07/27/18 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:9937

Case 2:12-cv BSJ Document 1429 Filed 11/13/18 Page 1 of 17

Case: 1:03-cv Document #: 824 Filed: 02/19/14 Page 1 of 17 PageID #:15009

CITY OF AUSTIN S ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

Case 2:12-cv BSJ Document 102 Filed 12/28/12 Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Case 4:11-cv ALM Document 354 Filed 10/13/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 7630

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 8:09-cv RAL-TBM Document 1300 Filed 07/06/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID 27542

Case 3:16-cv PK Document 591 Filed 03/14/18 Page 1 of 7

CAUSE NO. V. KARNES COUNTY, TEXAS. Defendants. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW JOHN JOSEPH FOSTER, INDIVIDUALLY; AND KELLY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Filing # E-Filed 09/28/ :42:23 PM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Appellant/Defendant, v. Case No. 12-C Appellant/Defendant. Case No.

Case 8:16-cv CJC-DFM Document 284 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 20 Page ID #:10028

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PETITIONER S BRIEF ON JURISDICTION

Case: 1:03-cv Document #: 894 Filed: 07/14/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:16961

Case 2:12-cv BSJ Document 627 Filed 04/04/14 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:16-CV-285 RECEIVER S FOURTH REPORT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed February 23, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Michael R.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. ERVIN A. HIGGS, as Property Appraiser of Monroe County, Florida, CASE NO. SC

Case 4:15-cv DLH-CSM Document 119 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 14

JAMES M. RAMSEY, JR., ET AL. OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE CLEO E. POWELL APRIL 16, 2015 COMMISSIONER OF HIGHWAYS

The Farming Communities Land Act

Released for Publication November 2, COUNSEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D

Case 4:15-cv DLH-CSM Document 35 Filed 06/26/15 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA NORTHWESTERN DIVISION

Filing # E-Filed 08/03/ :13:06 PM

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT JACQUELINE GRANGER AS INDEPENDENT ADMINSTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JUSTIN BOUDREAUX **********

William S. Graessle of William S. Graessle, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellees. In this eminent domain action, the JEA appeals a final order awarding

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:10-cv MO Document 123 Filed 08/02/11 Page 1 of 9 Page ID#: 1439

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Case No. 1:17-cv FB Case No. 1:17-cv FB. Appellant, -against-

UNOPPOSED ORDER GRANTING RECEIVER'S MOTION TO APPROVE THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY MAMC EMERALD CAY, LLC

Case 5:07-cv F Document 60 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 governs the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants of

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT MILWAUKEE COUNTY. Plaintiffs, Case No. 17CV5769 MOTION TO APPROVE TRANSITION OF FACILITIES TO NEW OPERATORS

Case 2:13-cv BCW Document 2 Filed 09/03/13 Page 1 of 9

Case Document 306 Filed in TXSB on 08/24/18 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:16-CV-285 RECEIVER S FIFTH REPORT

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. CASE NO. SC10-90 / SC10-91 (Consolidated) (Lower Tribunal Case No. s 3D08-944, )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Melissa A. Miles, Haynes & Boone, Dallas, TX, for Housing Authority of City of Dallas.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI

BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE G. STEVEN AGEE January 11, 2008 JANET SIMMONS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

INC SAURAGE COMPANY INC DBA SAURAGE REALTORS

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

DA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2010 MT 23N

NEW LEGISLATION 2017 Oregon Land Title Association Summary of Bills of Particular Interest to Title Companies

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY

mg Doc 8675 Filed 06/01/15 Entered 06/01/15 16:49:05 Main Document Pg 1 of 27

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel For the Eighth Circuit

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

Case KRH Doc 1201 Filed 01/07/16 Entered 01/07/16 10:57:10 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6

l. In this action, the Property Appraiser seeks to reverse a decision of the Miami-

NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE PERMANENT LAW REPORTS. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE August 15, 2007 Session

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Assembly Bill No. 140 Committee on Commerce and Labor

Case 6:18-cv CJS Document 1 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Appeal from summary judgment in an action to quiet title. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Gloria Sturman, Judge. Reversed and remanded.

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2008

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC Fourth DCA Case No. 4D09-728

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:16-CV-285 RECEIVER S SECOND REPORT

Case Doc 196 Filed 03/03/17 Entered 03/03/17 16:50:44 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6

HOME VALUE PROTECTION PROGRAM AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the New York Attorney General s Office (the Attorney General s

Plaintiff, ; IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TI{E llth JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

F L, E D MAR ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA. No

1. This is an action to challenge the Property Appraiser's assessment in. Plaintiff, UNIVERSAL CITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LTD., a

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Washington. Washington State's Real Estate Commission is part of the State's Department of Licensing, which regulates the real estate licensing.

1. As of January L,20L4,legaI title to the Subject Property was vested in The

Chapter 58 - HUMAN RELATIONS

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF SHOPPING CENTERS 2018 Canadian Law Conference

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2009

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

8:19-cv LSC-CRZ Doc # 1 Filed: 01/30/19 Page 1 of 11 - Page ID # 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

DRAFT PARK COUNTY US HIGHWAY 89 SOUTH EAST RIVER ROAD OLD YELLOWSTONE TRAIL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS

CHAPTER 13-REORGANIZATION

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2010

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

INTERPLEADER COMPLAINT THE PARTIES

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Transcription:

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3-06-CV-2136-P ABC VIATICALS, INC., C. KEITH LAMONDA, and JESSE W. LAMONDA, JR. Defendants, and LAMONDA MANAGEMENT FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, STRUCTURED LIFE SETTLEMENTS, INC., BLUE WATER TRUST, and DESTINY TRUST, Relief Defendants RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE SALE AND TO APPOINT APPRAISERS AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT TO THE HONORABLE JORGE A. SOLIS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: COMES NOW, Michael J. Quilling ( Receiver ), and files his Unopposed Motion to Sell Real Property at Private Sale and to Appoint Appraisers and in support of such would respectfully show unto the Court as follows: FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1. On November 17, 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission initiated these proceedings and requested the appointment of a receiver for the Defendants and Relief Defendants. The Court appointed Michael J. Quilling as Receiver for those parties and he has RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 1

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 2 of 6 continued to serve in that capacity. One of the entities covered by the receivership is Structured Life Settlements, Inc. 2. Subsequent to his appointment, the Receiver has taken constructive control and possession of certain real property in the name of Structured Life Settlements, Inc. located in Gainesville, Georgia with a street address of 3923 Muscadine Trail, Gainesville, Georgia 30506, and a legal description of Dist. 10, LL 154, Lot 2, Muscadine Valley, Hall County, Georgia (the Property ). 3. Structured Life Settlements, Inc. bought the property on or about August 1, 2005 for $150,000.00. 4. As part of his duties, and pursuant to 28 USCA 2001(b), the Receiver requests that he be allowed to market and sell the Property 1 by virtue of a private sale and that in connection therewith, the Court appoint three disinterested persons to appraise the Property. ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES 5. The ultimate purpose of a receivership is to provide a vehicle through which assets can be held, liquidated and distributed to the particular beneficiaries of the receivership. In this instance, the beneficiaries are the creditors and investors of ABC and its related entities. Allowing the Property to be sold by virtue of a private sale will both further and expedite the process. It will also allow the receivership estate to avoid ongoing liabilities for taxes, insurance, and maintenance. 6. A district court s power to supervise an equity receivership and to determine the appropriate action to be taken in the administration of the receivership is extremely broad. SEC v. Hardy, 803 F.2d 1034, 1038 (9 th Cir. 1986). It is a recognized principle of law that the district 1 Subject to Court approval to be sought by virtue of a separate Motion. A buyer has already been located but the requirements addressed in this Motion must be satisfied before the sale is brought before the Court. RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 2

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 3 of 6 court has broad powers and wide discretion to determine the appropriate relief in an equity receivership. SEC v. Lincoln Thrift Association, 577 F.2d 600, 606 (9 th Cir. 1978). See SEC v. Safety Finance Service, Inc., 674 F.2d 368, 372 (5 th Cir. 1982)(court overseeing a receivership is accorded wide discretionary power in light of the concern for orderly administration ). A primary purpose of equity receiverships is to promote orderly and efficient administration of the estate by the district court for the benefit of creditors. See SEC v. Wencke (Wencke II), 783 F.2d 829, 837 n.9 (9 th Cir. 1986). 7. To guide courts in this purpose, 28 USCA 2001 governs the sale of real property by order of the court by both public and private sale. Subsection (a) sets out the terms of a public sale and Subsection (b) sets out the procedure for a private sale. Subsection (b) provides as follows: After a hearing, of which notice to all parties shall be given by publication or otherwise as the court directs, the court may order the sale of such realty or interest or any part thereof at private sale for cash or other consideration and upon such terms and conditions as the court approves, if it finds that the best interests of the estate will be conserved thereby. Before confirmation of any private sale, the court shall appoint three disinterested persons to appraise such property. No private sale shall be confirmed at a price less than two-thirds of the appraisal value. Before confirmation of any private sale, the terms thereof shall be published in such newspaper or newspapers of general circulation as the court directs at least ten days before confirmation. The private sale shall not be confirmed if a bona fide offer is made, under conditions prescribed by the court, which guarantees at least a 10 per centum increase over the price offered in the private sale. RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 3

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 4 of 6 Taken in its entirety, 2001 provides safeguards to prevent the sale of realty through the use of unfair price or value procedures. 8. The district court has wide discretion in judging whether a receiver s sale is fair in terms and result and serves the best interests of the estate. Fleet National Bank v. H&D Entertainment, Inc., 96 F.3d 532 (1 st Cir. 1996) citing United States v. Peter, 777 F.2d 1294, 1298 n.6 (7 th Cir. 1985) and United States v. Branch Coal, 390 F.2d 7, 10 (3 rd Cir.), cert. Denied, 391 U.S. 966, 88 S.Ct. 2034 (1968). The court has broad discretion in setting the terms of conditions of a sale under 28 USCA 2001. United States v. Hundwardsen, 39 F.Supp.2d 1157 (N.D. Iowa 1999), citing United States v Branch Coal Corp, 390 F.2d 7, 10 (3 rd Cir.) cert. Denied, 391 U.S. 966, 88 S.Ct. 2034 (1968); see United States v. Garcia, 474 F.2d 1202, 1206 (5 th Cir. 1973). The court must decide whether, based on the record made by the parties, the best interests of the estate will be served by a public or private sale. Id. However, 2001(b) limits the receiver s ability to sell foreclosed property at a private sale for an unfair price by setting in place appraisal procedures and acceptable price limits. United States v. Stonehill, 83 F.3d 1156 (9 th Cir. 1996). Section 2001 contemplates compliance with certain procedures designed to protect the best interest of the estate Tanzier v. Huffines, 412 F.2d 221 (3 rd Cir. 1969). 9. In general, the court has broad discretion to set the terms of a public sale; whereas it must generally follow the procedures in place for a private sale. See Tanzier v. Huffines, 412 F.2d 221 (3 rd Cir. 1969)(federal statute expresses preferential course to be followed in connection with a court authorized sale of personal property and district court should not order otherwise except under extraordinary circumstances). In cases involving the private sale of realty, the courts have consistently adhered to the procedures outlined in 2001(b). See United States v. Garcia, 474 F.2d 1202 (5 th Cir. 1973)(court scrupulously adhered to statutory RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 4

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 5 of 6 requirements of 2001 for judicial sale of realty); U.S. v. A Manufacturing Company, 541 F.2d 504 (5 th Cir. 1976)(affirming court confirmation of realty sale for greater price than highest appraisal value). Consequently, broad discretion of the court does not include bypassing the specific procedures set out in 2001(b). To bypass the stringent requirements of 2001(b), the court can order a public sale under 2001(a) and set the terms and conditions as it so desires. 10. Accordingly, the Receiver respectfully requests that upon the final consideration of this matter that he be permitted to retain the services of three disinterested persons to appraise the Property and that he be authorized to market the Property for private sale. After the appraisals are obtained the Receiver will file a motion to actually sell the Property and to publish the proposed sale in the appropriate newspaper. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Receiver prays that upon final hearing and consideration of this matter that the Court authorize him to retain the services of three appraisers and to offer the property for private sale, and for such other and further relief, general or special, at law or in equity, to which the Receiver may show himself to be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, QUILLING, SELANDER, CUMMISKEY & LOWNDS, P.C. 2001 Bryan Street, Suite 1800 Dallas, Texas 75201 (214) 871-2100 (Telephone) (214) 871-2111 (Facsimile) By: /s/ Michael J. Quilling. Michael J. Quilling State Bar No. 16432300 D. Dee Raibourn, III State Bar No. 24009495 Brent Rodine State Bar No. 24048770 ATTORNEYS FOR RECEIVER RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 5

Case 3:06-cv-02136 Document 83 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 6 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE A true and correct copy of this motion has been served on all interested parties through the Court s electronic filing system. A copy will also be posted on the Receiver s website at www.secreceiver.com. /s/ Michael J. Quilling. Michael J. Quilling L:\MJQ\ABC Viaticals 911.1000\Pleadings\Receiver's Emergency Motion to Determine Receivership Assets.DOC RECEIVER S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SELL REAL PROPERTY AT PRIVATE - Page 6