Federal Trade Commission v. Midway Industries Limited Liability Company et al

Filing 98

CORRECTED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 78 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 12/31/2014 (cags, Deputy Clerk)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
CHAMBERS OF

101 WEST LOMBARD STREET
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201
[phone]
[phone] FAX

J. FREDERICK MOTZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

December 31, 2014

MEMO TO COUNSEL RE: Federal Trade Commission v. Midway Industries Limited
Liability Co., et al.
Civil No. JFM-14-2312
Dear Counsel:
I have reviewed the memoranda submitted in connection with Bank of America N.A.’s
motion to intervene. The motion (document 78) is denied. I am satisfied that the timely and
efficient resolution of this proceeding will best be served by Bank of America asserting its claim
during the claims process managed by the Receiver if I ultimately rule that such a process should
be established. As to the legal issues, I am satisfied that Bank of America has no legal right to
intervene because that action concerns the alleged misconduct of the named defendants.
That said, if Bank of America believes that the Receiver’s request for compensation and
out of pocket expenses is excessive, I direct that Bank of America’s counsel so advise me on or
before January 14, 2015. If Bank of America does lodge any such objection, the Receiver may
file a response on or before January 23, 2015. Until I have ruled on any objections that may be
filed, I ask that the Receiver refrain from paying himself.
I want to make it clear that this is not to suggest that I currently believe that the request
for compensation and expenses is excessive in any respect. I recognize, however, that the
payment of compensation and expenses will reduce any amount that I order to be ultimately
distributed. Jarndyce v. Jarndyce should never be far from a lawyer’s or judge’s consciousness.
Therefore, I believe that it is appropriate that the Bank of America be given an opportunity to
lodge any objections to the requested compensation and fees.
Despite the informal nature of this letter, it should be flagged as an opinion and docketed
as an order.
Very truly yours,
/s/
J. Frederick Motz
United States District Judge