United States Of America v. Harrell et al
Filing
41
ORDER STAYING CASE an additional 90 days from the date of this order, at which time the parties shall file a status report with the Court. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 2/19/15. (cmr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
CV
v,
312-111
LISTER HARRELL; SARALAND, LLLP;
MIDDLE GEORGIA ROAD BUILDERS,
INC.; and ROBERT SUTTON,
Defendants.
ORDER
Presently before the Court is the parties'1 joint motion to
continue the stay first imposed on July 2, 2014.
On October 7,
2014
and December 16,
2014,
this
(Docs.
33, 40.)
Court granted two
additional sixty-day extensions (docs. 37, 39) to allow the parties
to complete the drafting of
the
settlement documents and seek the
requisite approval from the bankruptcy court, all settling parties,
and the
appropriate officials within the federal government.
United
States
Saraland
Sutton
LLLP,
have
resolves
a
Environmental
Middle
entered
With the present motion,
1
Defendant
motion.
Lister
Georgia
into
significant
Protection
an
Road
Agency
Builders,
Administrative
portion of
the
Inc.,
Order
case.
and
on
(Doc.
The
Defendants
and
Robert
Consent
40,
Ex.
that
A.)
the parties seek to continue the stay for
Harrell
has
defaulted
and
is
not
a
party
to
this
an additional 90 days to allow the bankruptcy court to approve
Defendant Saraland's obligations under the Administrative Order on
Consent,
and to allow the parties to reach an agreement on draft
consent decree language.
For good cause shown,
matter
shall
this Order,
be
STAYED
the motion
(doc.
an additional NINETY
at which time the parties shall
40)
is GRANTED.
DAYS
from
the
This
date
of
file a status report
with the Court.
ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia,
this
/y^1 day of
February, 2015.
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT JUDGE
SOUTHgWDISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?