Simmons v. M/V Lady Kathryn II et al

Filing 83

ORDER denying without prejudice 56 Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants and Their Counsel Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court. Signed by Judge Gregory A. Presnell on 5/20/2009. (ED)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA O RLANDO DIVISION GARY SIMMONS, Plaintiff, -vsM/V LADY KATHRYN II, etc., in rem, VAN WORMER MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC., KATHRYN J. VAN WORMER, NORMAN N. VAN WORMER, AQUA YACHT HARBOR MARINA, Defendants. ______________________________________ Case No. 6:09-cv-544-Orl-31GJK ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants and Their Counsel Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court (Doc. 56) filed by the Plaintiff, Gary Simmons ("Simmons"), the response (Doc. 57) filed by the Defendants, and the supplemental briefs (Doc. 65, 66) prepared by both parties. Although the Court condemns the lack of candor and professional courtesy that have marked these proceedings so far, it is not clear at this point that sanctions are warranted.1 But it is time for the games to end. If they do not, the Court To be clear, the Court is not making a final determination on this issue, which may be revisited if events warrant. 1 will not hesitate to impose whatever form of sanctions may be required to move this case forward so that it may be resolved on the merits. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants and Their Counsel Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court (Doc. 56) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida on May 20, 2009. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Party -2-

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?