VFS Financing, Inc. v. Brooks Pride 2, LLC et al

Filing 35

ORDER re: 2 Attachment Petition - With Notice, 3 Motion for Order of Possession. Hearing as to 2 PETITION to Attach With Notice, 3 MOTION Order of Possession set for 12/22/2011 10:00 AM before Chief Judge Joseph N. Lapla nte. Joint timeline and Statement of Agreed Facts due 12/13/2011. Proposed Findings of Fact, Witness and Exhibit List due by 12/20/2011. Preliminary pretrial scheduled for 12/13 is postponed indefinitely. So Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph N. Laplante.(dae)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

VFS Financing, Inc.
v.

Civil No. 11-cv-478-JL

Brooks Pride 2, LLC, Harold
J. Brooks, and Maine Aviation
Aircraft Charter, LLC
PROCEDURAL ORDER:

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING

The preliminary pretrial conference scheduled for December
13, 2011 is postponed indefinitely.
The hearing on the motions for attachment and possession
(documents nos. 2 and 3) will be held on December 22, 2011 at
10:00 a.m.
On or before December 13, 2011, the parties shall jointly
file:
•

a single timeline setting forth all pertinent dates,
times, and events, in whatever format the parties
jointly choose (in other words, the parties need not
comply with the formatting and font requirements of
Local Rule 5.1(a) with respect to the timeline);

•

a single Statement of Agreed Facts followed by a
Statement of Disputed Facts. The disputed facts are
not an invitation to advocacy (i.e., "The plaintiff can
not establish irreparable harm because . . . .” or
"There is a strong likelood of success on the merits
because . . . .”). The parties should simply list
facts they intend to establish at the hearing, or which
they contend will not be established at the hearing.

On or before December 20, 2011, each party shall file:
•

a witness list;

•

an exhibit list; and

•

proposed findings of fact and rulings of law.

Counsel shall confer (preferably in person, or else by
telephone) in a good-faith effort to identify all areas of
agreement and to make the statement of facts and timeline as
comprehensive as possible, so that open court testimony can focus
on matters truly in dispute.

Counsel are expressly discouraged

from simply “recycling” factual statements submitted during
previous motion practice in this case.
Counsel shall confer before the hearing to identify all
areas of agreement and disagreement as to the admissibility of
each exhibit.

SO ORDERED.
Joseph N. Laplante
United States District Judge
Dated:
cc:

December 2, 2011

Peter Antonelli, Esq.
Thomas H. Curran, Esq.
David Himelfarb, Esq.
Ronald G. Sutherland, Esq.
Mark C. Rouvalis, Esq.
Nicholas F. Casolaro, Esq.
Mark L. Mallory, Esq.

2