USA, et al v. Alisal Water Corp, et al

Filing 932

ORDER (1) EXTENDING RECEIVERSHIP FOR LIMITED PURPOSE; AND (2) ADDRESSING 906 , 909 , 910 MATTERS HEARD ON OCTOBER 2, 2009. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 10/29/2009. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/29/2009)

Download PDF
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 27 28 1 **E-filed 10/29/2009** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALISAL WATER CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. Case Number C 97-20099 JF (HRL) ORDER1 (1) EXTENDING RECEIVERSHIP FOR LIMITED PURPOSE; AND (2) ADDRESSING MATTERS HEARD ON OCTOBER 2, 2009 [re: docket entries 906, 909, 910] On October 2, 2009, the Court conducted a hearing addressing: (1) Defendants' ex parte applications for an order directing the Receiver to take certain actions and terminating the receivership; (2) the Receiver's motion for contempt; and (3) the County of Monterey's request that the receivership be maintained. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court orders as follows: This disposition is not designated for publication in the official reports. C a s e No. C 97-20099 JF (HRL) O R D E R (1) EXTENDING RECEIVERSHIP FOR LIMITED PURPOSE ETC. ( JF L C 2 ) 1 2 3 (1) (2) (3) the transfer of the San Jerardo water system is approved; the $23,500 in trust funds held by Defendants' counsel, Gary Varga, shall be applied to the receivership fees and expenses previously approved by the Court2; all remaining outstanding receivership fees and expenses previously approved by the Court shall be paid from the $100,000 in funds held by the Receiver; the parties shall meet and confer with respect to any additional receivership fees and expenses, and such fees and expenses shall be submitted for Court approval only if the parties cannot agree with respect to payment of such fees and expenses; the Receiver's motion for contempt is denied; the receivership is extended until November 1, 2010 for the limited purpose of ensuring that the monthly shortfall with respect to San Jerardo's operation costs is paid3; and the Receiver is authorized to expend up to $2,000 per month of receivership funds, without further Court approval, to cover the shortfall with respect to San Jerardo's operation costs. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (7) (5) (6) (4) IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 29, 2009 __________________________________ JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge This order applies to any additional funds that may have been deposited in the trust account since the hearing. As discussed at the hearing, the operations costs to which the Court refers do not include the filtration costs, which will continue to be covered by the County of Monterey. 2 C a s e No. C 97-20099 JF (HRL) O R D E R (1) EXTENDING RECEIVERSHIP FOR LIMITED PURPOSE ETC. ( JF L C 2 ) 3 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 This Order was served on the following persons: David Patrick Nemecek , Jr Diana Donabedian Joe Alfred Izen , Jr dnemecek@manatt.com, mchavez@manatt.com ddonabedian@luce.com joeizen@joeizen.com, joeslowgo@hotmail.com jms01@i.frys.com Jonathan Mark Schwartz Kevin T. Haroff kharoff@ssd.com, sdavid@ssd.com lweiss@steefel.com, ycano@steefel.com Lenard Garsen Weiss Lori Jonas lori.jonas@usdoj.gov Mfairman@pacbell.net Marc Peter Fairman Mary Grace Perry perrym@co.monterey.ca.us, andradar@co.monterey.ca.us, coatsir@co.monterey.ca.us Paul Daniel Gullion pauldgullion@aol.com, ndgullion@aol.com Vargalaw@mbay.net, Vargalaw@SBCGlobal.net 13 Stephen Gary Varga 14 Steven O'Rourke 15 Vanessa W. Vallarta 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 C a s e No. C 97-20099 JF (HRL) O R D E R (1) EXTENDING RECEIVERSHIP FOR LIMITED PURPOSE ETC. ( JF L C 2 ) Steve.ORourke@usdoj.gov vanessav@ci.salinas.ca.us, julian@ci.salinas.ca.us

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?