Securities and Exchange Commission v. Schooler et al

Filing 1224

ORDER: Resetting Briefing Schedule, Requesting Additional Briefing re #1181 ; and Denying Investors' Motions Without Prejudice re #1194 , #1200 , #1204 , #1211 , #1221 , #1222 , and #1223 . Regarding #1181 , the Court continues the hearing on this motion to May 6, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D. Any opposition shall be filed on or before April 15, 2016. Any reply shall be filed on or before April 22, 2016. The Receiver shall file this proposal by close of business on April 22, 2016. Before the Court are seven motions filed by various investors who have invested in various GPs that are subject to the receivership. These motions are denied without prejudice on the basis of non-compliance. The hearings on motions ECF Nos. 1221, 1222, and 1223 currently set for April 29, 2016 are vacated. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 4/5/16. (dlg) (jao).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 CASE NO. 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA ORDER: RESETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 14 REQUESTING ADDITIONAL BRIEFING 15 [ECF No. 1181] 16 17 18 LOUIS V. SCHOOLER and FIRST FINANCIAL PLANNING CORPORATION, dba Western Financial Planning Corporation, Defendants. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DENYING INVESTORS’ MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE [ECF Nos. 1194, 1200, 1204, 1211, 1221, 1222, 1223] On February 4, 2016, the Receiver Thomas C. Hebrank (“Receiver”) moved for an order (a) authorizing the Receiver to conduct an orderly sale of General Partnership properties, (b) approving a plan of distributing receivership assets, and (c) approving procedures for the administration of investor claims. ECF No. 1181. The Court continues the hearing on this motion to May 6, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 2D. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that any opposition shall be filed on or before April 15, 2016.1 Any reply shall be filed on or before April 22, 2016. 27 28 1 To the extent that any investors intend to oppose the Receiver’s motion, the investors are DIRECTED to do so pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 24. -1- 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA 1 The Court directs additional briefing in advance of the May 6, 2016 hearing. 2 Specifically, the Court DIRECTS the Receiver to craft a proposal that would enable 3 general partnerships (“GPs”) that wish to do so to exit the receivership while 4 maintaining control of their properties instead of having their properties sold. The 5 proposal should include: (1) a procedure by which each GP could elect whether or not 6 to sell; (2) conditions that must be met by each GP that wishes not to sell showing that 7 the GP could maintain fiscal viability going forward; (3) conditions that must be met 8 by each GP to insure fairness to those investors within GPs which wish not to sell but 9 who individually wish to exit their investment; (4) conditions that must be met by each 10 GP to demonstrate their ability for self-governance; (5) alternatives for the disposal of 11 Western’s interest in such GPs; and (6) an assessment by the Receiver of the 12 advantages and disadvantages of the proposal. The Receiver shall file this proposal by 13 close of business on April 22, 2016. 14 Also before the Court are seven motions filed by various investors who have 15 invested in various GPs that are subject to the receivership. See ECF Nos. 1194, 1200, 16 1204, 1211, 1221, 1222, 1223. These motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE 17 on the basis of non-compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 24. The Dillon and Aguirre 18 investors are directed to follow Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 24 and file motions to intervene 19 to the extent that they wish to refile any of these motions. Accordingly, the hearings 20 on motions ECF Nos. 1221, 1222, and 1223 currently set for April 29, 2016 are 21 VACATED. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 DATED: April 5, 2016 25 26 HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL United States District Judge 27 28 -2- 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA

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?