In re: Terry Kenneth Vickery
Filing
23
ORDER Granting Appellee's 22 Motion to Transfer to or Join Real Party in Interest. Transferee Danning Gill is hereby substituted as the Appellee in these proceedings as the real party in interest and will participate in lieu of Diamond. All filings previously made by Diamond shall be deemed to have been filed by Danning Gill for purposes of proceeding hereafter. The Clerk of the Court is directed to remove Appellee Diamond from the electronic docket and to add Danning, Gill, Diamond & Kollitz, LLP in his place. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 03/19/2019. (athom, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 17-cv-02753-CMA
IN RE:
TERRY KENNETH VICKERY,
Debtor.
TERRY KENNETH VICKERY,
Appellant,
v.
RICHARD K. DIAMOND,
Appellee.
ORDER GRANTING APPELLEE’S MOTION TO TRANSFER TO OR JOIN REAL
PARTY IN INTEREST
This matter is before the Court on Appellee Richard K. Diamond’s Notice of
Transfer of Interest and Motion to Transfer to or Join Real Party in Interest. (Doc. # 22.)
Appellee Diamond is the Chapter 7 Trustee for IVDS Interactive Acquisition
Partners (“IIAP”), which holds a judgment against Appellant Terry Kenneth Vickery.
Appellee Diamond has notified the Court that in early January 2019, he, in his capacity
as the Chapter 7 Trustee, has “transferred all interests in the judgment and in the
collections proceedings thereunder to the law firm which has been general counsel to
the Chapter 7 Trustee in the California bankruptcy proceedings, Danning, Gill, Diamond
& Kollitz, LLP (‘Danning Gill’).” (Id. at 1.) Appellee Diamond moves the Court to “order
that Danning Gill be substituted or joined as Appellee in these appellate proceedings”
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(c) and Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 43(b). (Id. at 2.) Appellee Diamond also requests that all filings previously
made by [Appellee] Diamond in this matter should be deemed to have been filed by
Danning Gill for purposes of proceeding hereafter.” (Id.) Appellant Vickery has not
timely filed any response to Appellee Diamond’s Motion. The Court therefore treats the
Motion as unopposed. See Walter v. HSM Receivables, No. 13-cv-00564-RM-KLM,
2014 WL 5395197, at *1 (D. Colo. Oct. 23, 2014) (“The Motion is essentially unopposed
as no response has been filed by Defendants.”) The Court also determines that a
hearing is not necessary to resolve the Motion, as Appellant Vickery does not dispute
anything in the Motion. See 7C Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice
& Procedure § 1958 (2018) (“The Court may also decide the [Rule 25] motion without
an evidentiary hearing if it determines it is not necessary.”); Sullivan v. Running Waters
Irrigation, Inc., 739 F.3d 354, 259 (7th Cir. 2014).
The Court, having reviewed the Motion and its exhibits and relevant legal
authority, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, GRANTS Appellee
Diamond’s Motion to Transfer or to Join Real Party in Interest, Danning Gill, pursuant to
Rule of Civil Procedure 25(c) and Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(b). (Doc. # 22.) It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Transferee Danning Gill is hereby substituted as the
Appellee in these proceedings as the real party in interest and will participate in lieu of
2
Diamond. All filings previously made by Diamond shall be deemed to have been filed
by Danning Gill for purposes of proceeding hereafter. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the caption in this matter shall be amended in all
future filings to reflect the substitution of Danning Gill for Diamond. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to remove Appellee
Diamond from the electronic docket and to add Danning, Gill, Diamond & Kollitz, LLP in
his place.
DATED: March 19, 2019
BY THE COURT:
_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge
3
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?