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

Filing 2586

ORDER denying without prejudice 2583 Motion for Forfeiture of Property; denying 2584 Motion for Order. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/27/12. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION ~NITED STATES v. OF AMERICA, et ale PLAINTIFFS No.4:80-cv-109-DPM VERTAC CHEMICAL CORP., et ale DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court and counsel held another productive status conference on 27 January 2012. The Court appreciates counsel's continue diligence. While the Court approves, in general, the plan set out in the Receiver's Motion to Disclaim Interest in Property, Document No. 2583, and his Motion for Order Establishing Notice of Receiver's intent to Abandon Real Estate and Establishing Deadlines for Objections, Document No. 2584, it became apparent at the status conference that these motions were premature. The parties have more to do on several fronts before the motions' substance can be addressed. The Court therefore denies them without prejudice. The Court intends to hold what it hopes will be a final status conference on a convenient day in mid-May 2012. Before that, however, several things need to happen so that this matter continues to move toward resolution. First, the Receiver should file a rough budget for the remaining necessary expenditures by 1 March 2012. Second, the Receiver must report by 1 March 2012 on a definite plan for the records-whether incineration or depositing them with UALR. Third, the parties should file a joint status report by 2 April 2012. The report should update the Court on all open issues, particularly whether the parties have reached agreement on the "institutional control policy" and the side agreement about continued maintenance of the property. Motions, Document Nos. 2583 & 2584, denied without prejudice. So Ordered. Z/ D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge ;J.. 7 -2­ ~ ;l.olcJ.­

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?