USA, et al v. Vertac Chemical Corp, et al

Filing 2574

ORDER reappointing Lee A. Thalheimer's appointment as Receiver for Vertac, nunc pro tunc, for a term running from August 1, 2002 until July 31, 2012. All counsel must register with the CM-ECF system in the Eastern District of Arkansas, if they have not already done so, by July 31, 2011. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/8/11. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL. v. PLAINTIFFS Case No. 4:80-cv-109-DPM VERTAC CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ET AL. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court held a status conference on 8 July 2011. In anticipation of the conference, the parties began collaborating about a path to end the receivership and terminate the consent decree. The prospects are promising. The Court will hold another status conference at 2:00 p.m. on 20 October 2011. It appears from the record that Lee A. Thalheimer's appointment as Receiver for Vertac lapsed on 31 July 2002. Notwithstanding the lapse, his actions between that date and today have been taken pursuant to, and consistent with, authority previously granted by this Court. The Court therefore ratifies those actions. Further, the Court reaffirms all orders about the receivership entered during the lapse. And Mr. Thalheimer is reappointed Receiver for Vertac, nunc pro tunc, for a term running from 1 August 2002 until 31 July 2012, with hopes that the receivership can be concluded sooner. This case began long before electronic filing arrived in the Eastern District of Arkansas. Many lawyers in this case are not registered with the CM-ECF system. All counsel must therefore register if they have not already done so. There is no registration fee. If you do not register, you will not receive notices of electronic filing, nor will you receive hard copies of orders. Counsel have until 31 July 2011 to complete this registration. So Ordered. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?