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

Filing 2660

ORDER directing the parties to sign the settlement agreement and close the real estate transactions by May 31, 2013. The Court further orders the Receiver to file his final petition on all loose ends by June 11, 2013. The Receiver's appointment is extended to July 3, 2013. Any party who misses any of these ddls without seeking and getting prior Court approval must show why some sanction would not be appropriate. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/8/13. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al. v. PLAINTIFFS No. 4:80-cv-109-DPM VERTAC CHEMICAL CORPORATION, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court is a bit bewildered. Hercules's 30 April 2013 notice of conforming changes to the settlement agreement, NQ 2657, is appreciated. These modest and clarifying revisions were needed. They're all approved. And the Court thanks the parties for seeking, out of an abundance of caution, Court approval of them. But we have again fallen behind schedule. The Court's March 28th Order was plain: the settlement agreement was supposed to be finalized and signed, and the real estate transactions closed, as soon as possible; and notice of completion of both had to be filed by 30 April2013. NQ 2648 at 4-5. What happened? In any event, it is time to sprint across the finish line. The Court orders the parties to sign the settlement agreement and close the real estate transactions by 31 May 2013. The Court orders the Receiver to file his final petition on all loose ends by 11 June 2013. The Receiver's appointment must now be, and is, extended to 3 July 2013. Any party who misses any of these deadlines without seeking and getting prior Court approval before a deadline must show cause why some sanction would not be appropriate in the circumstances. So Ordered. {/ D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 8 -2- tv/1 ')..013

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?