FirsTier Bank, Kimball, Nebraska v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation et al

Filing 58

ORDER denying Adams Motion Requesting Order for Mandatory Mediation (Case No. 12-cv-00240, Doc. # 55) by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 8/7/12. (dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 11-cv-03231-CMA-MJW (Consolidated for All Purposes with
Civil Action No. 11-cv-03404-CMA-KMT and
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00240-CMA-KMT)
FIRSTIER BANK, KIMBALL, NEBRASKA, a Nebraska Bank,
Plaintiff,
v.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for
FIRSTIER BANK, LOUISVILLE, COLORADO, a Colorado Bank in receivership,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR MANDATORY MEDIATION

This matter is before the Court on Adams Bank & Trust’s (“Adams”) Motion
Requesting Order for Mandatory Mediation.1 (Case No. 12-cv-00240, Doc. # 55.)
In this motion, Adams requests an order requiring the parties to engage in nonbinding
mediation. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in its capacity as Receiver for
FirsTier Bank, Inc., Louisville, Colorado (“FDIC-R”), and FirsTier Bank, Kimball,
Nebraska (“FTB-NE”) oppose Adams’ motion. (Doc. # 56.)

1

On May 8, 2012, this Court issued an order consolidating Cases No. 12-cv-00240 and
No. 11-cv-003404 with Case No. 11-cv-03231. The docket entry instructed that all future filings
“shall be docketed in Case No. 11-cv-03231-CMA-MJW.” (Case No. 12-cv-00240, Doc. # 50.)
Despite this instruction, the instant motion was filed incorrectly in Case No. 12-cv-00240.
Apparently, the Court must emphasize that all future filings shall be filed in Case No. 11-cv03231. The Court may refuse to consider any future filings that do not comply with this
instruction.

All parties to these consolidated actions agree that they share a “general
willingness” to participate in early mediation. Without conferring with the other parties
as required by D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1, Adams filed the instant motion, proposing as
mediator Steve Clymer, Accord ADR Group, Boulder, Colorado, for a mediation in the
Denver area. As FDIC-R and FTB-NE point out, the parties have not agreed on any
details regarding a possible mediation. Given the parties agreement to participate in
a mediation, the Court strongly encourages the parties to resolve any impasse so that
they may enjoy the benefits of mediation. However, the Court agrees with FDIC-R and
FTB-NE that Adams’ motion is not the appropriate way to resolve a dispute concerning
the details of a possible mediation, and the Court need not, and should not, be involved
in any negotiations between the parties on this issue.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Adams’ Motion Requesting Order for Mandatory
Mediation (Case No. 12-cv-00240, Doc. # 55) is DENIED.
DATED: August

07

, 2012
BY THE COURT:

_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge

2