PHC Castor N.V. v. Stewart

Filing 68

ORDER granting in part 28 Motion for Prejudgment Remedy; granting 29 Motion for Disclosure. Signed by Judge Donna F. Martinez on 6/19/13. (Nichols, J.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
PHC CASTOR N.V.,
Plaintiff,
v.
WILLIAM P. STEWART, III,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CASE NO. 3:12CV445(RNC)

RULING ON MOTIONS FOR PREJUDGMENT REMEDY
AND DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS
Plaintiff PHC Castor N.V. brings this diversity action
alleging that pro se defendant William P. Stewart, III defaulted
on debt obligations.

Pending before the court are the

plaintiff's Motion for Prejudgment Remedy and Motion for
Disclosure of Assets pursuant to pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat.
§ 52-278a et seq.

(Docs. #28, #29.)

The motions are before the

undersigned pursuant to the referral of District Judge Robert N.
Chatigny (doc. #26) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).

See SS & C

Technologies, Inc. v. Providence Inv. Management, 582 F. Supp.
2d 255, 256 n.1 (D. Conn. 2008) (magistrate judge may decide
prejudgment remedy as nondispositive motion).
On January 9, 2013, the court conducted a hearing at which
defendant and plaintiff's financial advisor testified.

On the

basis of that hearing, and taking into account the claims and
defenses of defendant, there is probable cause that a judgment

1

in the amount of $550,000 will be rendered in the matter in
favor of plaintiff.1

See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278d(a)(1).

This

amount reflects a principal debt of $250,000 plus simple
interest at 10% of the principal for each of the twelve years in
which the debt has been outstanding.
Plaintiff's Motion for Prejudgment Remedy (doc. #28) is
GRANTED in the amount of $550,000.

As a result, plaintiff's

Motion for Disclosure of Assets (doc. #29) is GRANTED.
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278n.
take defendant's deposition.

See

By July 10, 2013, plaintiff may
Defendant shall disclose to the

plaintiff the existence, location and extent of any property, as
defined by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278a(e), sufficient to satisfy
a judgment in the amount of $550,000.
SO ORDERED at Hartford, Connecticut this 19th day of June,
2013.
_________/s/___________________
Donna F. Martinez
United States Magistrate Judge

1

When deciding a motion for prejudgment remedy, the court
must "tak[e] into account any defenses, counterclaims, or set
offs." Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278d(a). In his Answer to the
Amended Complaint, defendant raises the defense that plaintiff
lacks standing to enforce the claims. (Doc. #50.) On February
22, 2013, plaintiff briefed the issue of standing in response to
the court's order to show cause. (Docs. #52, #60.) The court
has considered these submissions carefully in making this
determination.
2