Bonilla v. Librati et al
| NAHIM JORGE BONILLA |
| SIERRA DREW SMEBAKKER, John Doe, SIERRA DREW SMEBAKKEN, SIMON LIBRATI and Yacht 87 LLC |
| MVP GROUP LLC |
| SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC, Mandrake Holdings, LLC and Fusion Miami, LLC |
| 1:2021cv21588 |
| April 24, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Lauren Fleischer Louis |
| K Michael Moore |
| Negotiable Instrument |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 167 Amended MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by MVP GROUP LLC. Responses due by 12/3/2021 (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 166 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by MVP GROUP LLC. Responses due by 12/2/2021 (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 165 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #81 Intervenor Complaint with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by MVP GROUP LLC. Mandrake Holdings, LLC served on 11/2/2021, response/answer due 11/23/2021. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 164 PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge K. Michael Moore: Motion Hearing held on 11/16/2021 re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion, filed by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. Total time in court: 1 hour(s) : 23 minutes. Attorney Appearance(s): Kendrick Almaguer and Clay Michael Naughton on behalf of Simon Librati and Yacht 87, LLC; Samuel M. Sheldon on behalf of MVP Group LLC; David Philip Milian on behalf of Nahim Jorge Bonilla; Theresa Montalbano Bennett on behalf of Georgetown Yacht Partners, LLC. Court Reporter: Tammy Nestor, 305-523-5148 / Tammy_Nestor@flsd.uscourts.gov. (elm) |
Filing 163
PAPERLESS ORDER denying as moot #161 Motion for Extension of Time; denying as moot #162 Amended Motion for Extension of Time. Local Rule 26.1(a) permits the parties to stipulate to modify a procedure governing discovery including, relevant here, to a longer or different deadline to respond to discovery requests. Defendants' Amended Motion represents that Plaintiff's counsel agreed to the extension of time sought. According, the Motion #162 is moot and denied as such. Defendants' Motion to Compel #161 is mooted by virtue of the Amended Motion and also denied as such. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 11/15/2021. (LFL)
|
| Filing 162 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Plaintiff's Requests for Production to include Amended Certificate of Conference by Simon Librati. Responses due by 11/29/2021 (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 161 MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Plaintiff's Requests for Production by Simon Librati. Responses due by 11/29/2021 (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 160 Clerks Receipt for deposit into the court registry per order of the court (DE#95) received on 11/15/2021 in the amount of $ 1,000,000.0, receipt number FLS100240147. (vt) |
| Filing 159 NOTICE by Georgetown Yacht Partners LLC re #149 Response in Support of Motion, of Filing Affidavit (Attachments: #1 Affidavit) (Bennett, Theresa) |
|
Filing 158
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Nahim Jorge Bonilla's ("Plaintiff") Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation. #144 . Therein, Plaintiff requests leave to exceed the page limit set by Local Rule 7.1(c)(2) of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida ("Local Rules") by five pages for his motion to dismiss Defendants Simon Librati ("Librati") and Yacht 87, LLC's ("Yacht 87") Amended Counterclaim. Id. at 1-2. Plaintiff argues that an enlargement of the page limit is warranted because Plaintiff "requires the additional five pages to address the counts raised in Defendants' Amended Counterclaim." Id. at 2. Librati and Yacht 87 filed a Response in Opposition to Bonilla's Motion to Add Five Pages to Motion to Dismiss Amended Counterclaim #152 , in which they "do not have any particular reason to object" except to express that Plaintiff "wasted pages with unnecessary and irrelevant diatribe." #152 at 1. The Court finds good cause to enlarge the page limit set by the Local Rules. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion #144 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limitation #144 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 11/15/2021. (elm)
|
|
Filing 157
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the filing of Defendants Simon Librati's and Yacht 87, LLC's Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses and Simon Librati's and Prime Med, LLC's Amended Counterclaim. #128 . The Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses and the Amended Counterclaim #128 moots Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Nahim Jorge Bonilla's Motion to Strike Defendant Simon Librati's Affirmative Defenses #104 and Motion to Dismiss Defendant, Simon Librati's Counterclaims or in the Alternative Motion for a More Definite Statement #106 . Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses and the Amended Counterclaim #128 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike #104 and Motion to Dismiss #106 are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 11/15/2021. (elm)
|
|
Filing 156
PAPERLESS ORDER STRIKING Defendants' First Response to Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions #143 . Local Rule 26.1(b) prohibits the filing of discovery requests, responses, objections, notices, or any associated proof of service until they are used in the proceedings or the Court orders their filing. See S. D. Fla. L. R. 26(1)(b). There is no indication, in the Response or otherwise, of its use in this proceeding at this time. Accordingly, the Response is hereby STRICKEN. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 11/15/2021. (eb00)
|
| Filing 155 Corrected REPLY to Response to Motion re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, Response filed by MVP filed by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Bank Statements)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 154 REPLY to Response to Motion re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, Response filed by Bonilla filed by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit Exhibit G)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 153 REPLY to Response to Motion re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, Response filed by MVP filed by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Bank Statements)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 152 RESPONSE in Opposition re #144 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages to Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Amended Counterclaim filed by Simon Librati. Replies due by 11/22/2021. (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 151 RESPONSE in Opposition re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Replies due by 11/19/2021. (Milian, David) |
| Filing 150 MOTION to Dismiss with Prejudice #128 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 11/29/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 149 RESPONSE in Support re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, filed by Georgetown Yacht Partners LLC. Attorney Theresa Montalbano Bennett added to party Georgetown Yacht Partners LLC(pty:ip). (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Purchase and Sale Agreement, #2 Exhibit Bio of Principals, #3 Exhibit USCG Vessel Abstract)(Bennett, Theresa) |
| Filing 148 MOTION to Strike #128 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 11/29/2021 (Milian, David) |
| Filing 147 RESPONSE to Motion re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, filed by MVP GROUP LLC. Replies due by 11/19/2021. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 146 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO. Motion Hearing set for 11/16/2021 01:00 PM in Miami Division before Judge K. Michael Moore. All Parties with an interest in the Vessel at issue in this matter shall appear in person per ECF No. 145. (elm) |
|
Filing 145
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the filing of Defendants Simon Librati's ("Librati") and Yacht 87, LLC's ("Yacht 87") (collectively, "Defendants") Urgent Motion to Dissolve TRO as Vessel Has Been Sold and Required Monies Have Been Paid to Court Registry #140 . On June 23, 2021, the Court modified the terms of the temporary restraining order ("TRO") in this matter to permit the "sale of the Vessel to a third-party provided the sale nets at least $1,000,000.00" and provided that Yacht 87 "post $1,000,000.00 to the Court's Registry subsequent to the sale of the Vessel." 58 . As set forth in this Court's Order, upon posting the required monies to the Court's Registry, Yacht 87 may "move the Court to dissolve the remaining terms of the TRO as it applies to the Vessel." Id. Now, Defendants inform the Court that (1) they are "in the process of selling the Vessel," (2) a mortgage was obtained to acquire $1,000.000.00, and (3) $1,000.000.00 has been deposited into the Court's Registry. #140 at 3. In addition, Defendants inform the Court that the sale will close on Friday, November 12, 2021, and that to "complete the sale... the buyer is requiring the Defendant provide an Order from this Court releasing the vessel from the TRO and purported trust and or lien claims of [Intervenor-Plaintiff] MVP [Group LLC]." Id. at 3-4. Thus, Defendants request that "the TRO on the Vessel apply to the [$1,000,000.00] in the Court Registry, freeing the Vessel itself of the TRO, and the Intervenor claims, so that the sale can close." Id. at 4. Defendants' Motion certifies that Intervenor MVP Group LLC ("MVP Group") does not object to the Motion, and that Plaintiff Nahim Jorge Bonilla ("Bonilla") objects to the expedited nature of the Motion but has not indicated whether he objects to the relief sought. Id. at 5. The Court notes that Defendants' Motion was filed at 5:02 PM on November 10, 2021, the night before the Court closed until Monday, November 15, 2021. See S.D. Fla. Admin. Order 2021-84. On November 10, 2021 at 10:09 PM, Bonilla filed his Opposition and Request for Information and to Set a Briefing Schedule to Address Simon Librati's and Yacht 87, LLC's Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order #141 . Therein, Bonilla requests that the Court (1) deny Defendants' Motion without prejudice, (2) compel Librati and Yacht 87 to disclose information related to the sale of the Vessel, and (3) set a briefing schedule whereby, upon receipt of the requested information, Bonilla would have 7 days to file a response to Defendants' Motion and Defendants would have 5 days to file a reply. #141 at 3. Bonilla asserts that Defendants seek to dissolve the TRO and sell the vessel without having disclosed a sales contract, sales price and evidence of market value, or the identity of the buyer. Id. at 2. In addition, Bonilla argues that the $1,000,000.00 to be deposited into the Court's Registry represents a floor, not a cap, for the amount to be deposited. Id. Further, Bonilla argues that Defendants failed to confer in good faith as required by Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, "filed the instant [M]otion anyway, and then failed to correctly recite Plaintiff's position in [their] Certificate of Conference." Id. Librati and Yacht 87 filed their Reply #142 on November 11, 2021 at 11:11 AM. Therein, Defendants assert that (1) Bonilla's counsel "failed to simply call" Defendants' counsel, "who had been attempting to call him," (2) the Court has authorized the sale of the Vessel, (3) the $1,000,000.00 to be deposited into the Court's Registry does not represent a floor, (4) Bonilla's approval is not required for the sale because $1,000,000.00 has been deposited into the Court's Registry, and (5) "[i]t just so happens that the sale of the Vessel is netting considerably less than the original purchase price." #142 at 2. Here, it is not clear based on the record before the Court whether Defendants have fully complied with this Court's Order modifying the terms of the TRO. 58 . First, as noted above, the Court's Order modifying the terms of the TRO permits the "sale of the Vessel to a third-party provided the sale nets at least $1,000,000.00" and provided that Yacht 87 "post $1,000,000.00 to the Court's Registry subsequent to the sale of the Vessel." 58 . However, Defendants have not identified the buyer, so it is not yet clear whether the sale is to a third party, as required by the TRO. Second, while Defendants claim in their Reply that "[i]t just so happens that the sale of the Vessel is netting considerably less than the original purchase price," #142 at 2, they have not necessarily demonstrated that the sale will net at least $1,000,000.00, as required by the TRO. Third, although Defendants assert that $1,000,000.00 has been deposited into the Court's Registry and have attached an email confirmation from their bank that the wire transfer was successful, #140 at 4; [140-1] at 1, the Court is unable to confirm receipt because, as noted above, the Court is closed until November 15, 2021. In addition, Bonilla's counsel's allegation that Defendants' counsel failed to engage in good faith conferral and inaccurately represented Bonilla's position is cause for particular concern. See #141 at 2. The Court must be assured that Defendants' counsel's certification of good faith conferral accurately represents the position of MVP Group. Based on the foregoing, and because Defendants have informed the Court that the sale "may be extended so that the order dissolving the sale can be obtained from this Court," #140 at 3, the Court finds good cause to set an expedited briefing schedule and a hearing on Defendants' Motion #140 . The Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida provide that "[t]he Court may, upon written motion and good cause shown, waive the time requirements of [] Local Rule [7.1(c)] and grant an immediate or expedited hearing on any matter requiring such expedited procedure." S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(d). Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Parties shall comply with the following expedited briefing schedule: any Party that has an interest in the Vessel shall respond to the Motion #140 by close of business on Friday, November 12, 2021; Librati and Yacht 87 shall file their reply, if any, to the responses of the interested Parties, if any, on or before Sunday, November 14, 2021. In addition, this matter is now set for a hearing on Tuesday, November 16, 2021 at 1:00 PM before the Honorable K. Michael Moore, United States District Judge, United States Courthouse, Courtroom 13-1, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. All Parties with an interest in the Vessel at issue in this mater, including Bonilla, Librati, Yacht 87, and MVP Group, shall appear in person. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 11/11/2021. (elm)
|
| Filing 144 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages to Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Amended Counterclaim by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 143 STRICKEN PER DE 156. First RESPONSE To Plaintiff's First Request for Admissions by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Ticktin, Peter) Modified on 11/15/2021 (lbc). |
| Filing 142 REPLY to Response to Motion re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, filed by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 141 RESPONSE in Opposition re #140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Replies due by 11/17/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Composite Exhibit A)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 140 EXPEDITED MOTION To Dissolve TRO re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, by Simon Librati, Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 139 NOTICE of Lis Pendens by Simon Librati for property located at Miami, Florida (Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 138
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Amended Counterclaim #135 . Therein, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Nahim Jorge Bonilla ("Bonilla") requests a 4-day extension of time, up to and including November 12, 2021, to respond to Simon Librati's and Prime Med, LLC's Amended Counterclaim because of "the recent press of other matters on Bonilla's counsel." #135 at 1-2. The Motion is unopposed. Id. at 2. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds good cause to grant Bonilla's timely request for a 4-day extension of time. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion #135 is GRANTED. Bonilla shall respond to the Amended Counterclaim on or before November 12, 2021. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 11/9/2021. (elm)
|
|
Filing 137
ORDER denying #121 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 11/9/2021. See attached document for full details. (eb00)
|
| Filing 136 PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis: Motion Hearing held on 11/9/2021 re #121 Amended Motion to Compel. Motion is denied. Written order to follow. Total time in court: 20 minutes. Attorney Appearance(s): David Philip Milian, Kendrick Almaguer, Alexa Penalta. (Digital 09:30:53) (aw) |
| Filing 135 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #128 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 134 NOTICE of Lis Pendens by Simon Librati for property located at Miami, Florida (Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 133
PAPERLESS ORDER RESCHEDULING TRIAL IN MIAMI. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Joint Motion to Modify the Order Setting Trial and Pre-Trial Schedule #129 of Simon Librati ("Librati), Sea-Era Charters, LLC ("SEC"), Fusion Miami, LLC, Yacht 87, LLC ("Yacht 87"), Nahim Jorge Bonilla ("Bonilla"), and MVP Group, LLC. Therein, the Parties request a 77-day extension of the deadlines set forth in the Court's Order Scheduling Trial. 63 at 1. The Parties, thus, seek a 77-day continuance of trial. "District courts have 'unquestionable' authority to control their own dockets." Smith v. Psychiatric Sol., Inc., 750 F.3d 1253, 1262 (11th Cir. 2014) (internal citation omitted). "This authority includes 'broad discretion in deciding how best to manage the cases before them.'" Id. (internal citation omitted). Once a scheduling order is entered, it "may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). "To establish good cause, the party seeking the extension must establish that the schedule could not be met despite the party's diligence." Ashmore v. Sec'y, Dep't of Transp., 503 F. App'x 683, 685 (11th Cir. 2013); see also Sosa v. Airprint Sys., Inc., 133 F.3d 1417, 1419 (11th Cir. 1998). Here, the Parties' request for an extension of the deadlines centers on the fact that this case has increased in complexity since the Court's Order Scheduling Trial 63 was entered. The Parties inform the Court that this case began as a narrow dispute among Bonilla, Sierra Smebakken, SEC, and a John Doe later identified as Yacht 87, #129 at 2, but that the Intervenor Complaint #68 , subsequently amended as the Amended Intervenor Complaint #81 , and Librati's Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses #77 added new parties and claims to this case such that the number of disputed transactions and business ventures involved has greatly expanded. #129 at 23. According to the Parties, this, in turn, has expanded the potential scope of discovery, number of depositions, and issues requiring expert testimony, id., such that an extension of the deadlines is needed to meet the expert, discovery, and pretrial motions deadlines. Id. at 6. Because this case has expanded in complexity since the Joint Scheduling Report was filed, in terms of the number of claims asserted among a now larger set of parties, the Court finds that there is good cause to extend the pretrial deadlines and to continue trial to permit meaningful discovery. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion #129 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion #129 is GRANTED. This case is now set for trial commencing the two-week trial period of June 6, 2022, at 9 a.m. in Courtroom 13-1, (thirteenth floor) United States Courthouse, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. All parties are directed to report to the calendar call on June 2, 2022, at 2 p.m., at which time all matters relating to the scheduled trial date may be brought to the attention of the Court. A final pretrial conference as provided for by Rule 16, Fed. R. Civ. P., and Rule 16.1(C), S.D. Fla. L.R., is scheduled for May 24, at 11 a.m. The calendar call and the final pretrial conference will take place in Courtroom 13-1 (thirteenth floor), United States District Courthouse, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. The Court's Paperless Order Scheduling Trial 63 and Paperless Order of Referral to Mediation 54 remain in effect except that the deadlines therein shall be calculated based on the newly scheduled trial date. For example, any and all pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment, Daubert motions, and motions in limine must be filed no later than eighty (80) days prior to the newly scheduled trial date. THE FILING BY COUNSEL OF A "NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY" BY MOTION OR OTHERWISE IS NOT PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE LOCAL RULES AND SHALL NOT BE PRESUMED TO ALTER OR MODIFY THE COURT'S SCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 10/29/2021. (elm)
|
| Filing 132 Summons Issued as to Mandrake Holdings, LLC. (pcs) |
| Filing 131 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) c/o FL Secretary of State by MVP GROUP LLC re #81 Intervenor Complaint filed by MVP GROUP LLC (Sheldon, Samuel) |
|
Filing 130
PAPERLESS ORDER denying as moot #111 Motion to Compel in light of #121 Defendant's Amended Motion to Compel. Motion Hearing on #121 Defendant's Amended Motion to Compel set for 11/9/2021 09:30 AM in Miami Division before Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis. Appearances may be made in person at the United States Courthouse, C. Clyde Atkins Bldg., 11th Floor, 301 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 10/27/2021. (eb00)
|
| Filing 129 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to modify the order setting trial and pre-trial schedule re 63 Scheduling Order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, by Nahim Jorge Bonilla(individually, and as a member of Sea-Era Charters, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Corporation), Nahim Jorge Bonilla, Fusion Miami, LLC, Simon Librati, MVP GROUP LLC, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC, Yacht 87 LLC. Responses due by 11/8/2021 (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, #2 Affidavit Affidavit of G. Alexa Penalta)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 128 Ameded ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand , Amended COUNTERCLAIM against Nahim Jorge Bonilla, Nahim Jorge Bonilla by Yacht 87 LLC, Simon Librati. (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 127 REPLY to Response to Motion re #105 MOTION TO DISMISS #81 Intervenor Complaint FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM MOTION to Stay filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 126 Summons (Affidavit) Returned Unexecuted by MVP GROUP LLC as to Mandrake Holdings, LLC. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 125 Notice of Adoption by Fusion Miami, LLC Related document: 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by MVP GROUP LLC, #89 MOTION to Dismiss 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 124 REPLY to Response to Motion re #89 MOTION to Dismiss 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by Simon Librati. (Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 123 RESPONSE in Opposition re #105 MOTION TO DISMISS #81 Intervenor Complaint FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM MOTION to Stay filed by MVP GROUP LLC. Replies due by 10/18/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 122 RESPONSE to Motion re #121 Amended MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Replies due by 10/15/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(Milian, David) |
| Filing 121 Amended MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories by Simon Librati. Responses due by 10/21/2021 (Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 120
PAPERLESS ORDER denying as moot #110 Motion to Compel. In light of #111 Defendant's Corrected Motion to Compel, Defendant's original Motion is hereby DENIED as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 10/5/2021. (eb00)
|
|
Filing 119
PAPERLESS ORDER requiring amendment and expedited response. This Cause is before the Court on #111 Defendant's Motion to Compel. Defendant's Motion is facially deficient as it fails to properly certify pre-filing conferral. Rule 7.1(a)(3) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida requires that counsel for the moving party certify that he or she has conferred, or made reasonable effort to confer, with all parties or non-parties who may be affected by the relief sought in the motion in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in the motion and has been unable to do so. A court may deny a motion on a party's failure to confer alone. S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(a)(3). Accordingly, before the Motion will be decided, Defendant shall amend the Motion and cure this deficiency on or before October 7, 2021. If the relief is opposed, Plaintiff shall respond to Defendant's Motion and explain his position or before October 8, 2021. Defendant may reply, if at all, by October 13, 2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis on 10/5/2021. (eb00)
|
| Filing 118 RESPONSE in Opposition re #89 MOTION to Dismiss 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by MVP GROUP LLC. Replies due by 10/12/2021. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 117 Clerks Non-Entry of Default as to Yacht 87 LLC - Motions Terminated: #113 Motion for Clerks Entry of Default. Reason: Responsive pleading (i.e. Motion for Extention of Time to File Answer to Complaint, Motion to Dismiss Complaint, etc) has been filed Signed by DEPUTY CLERK on 10/4/2021. (pcs) |
| Filing 116 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jennifer Marie Hernandez on behalf of Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Attorney Jennifer Marie Hernandez added to party Nahim Jorge Bonilla(pty:pla). (Hernandez, Jennifer) |
| Filing 115 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by David Philip Milian on behalf of Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Attorney David Philip Milian added to party Nahim Jorge Bonilla(pty:pla). (Milian, David) |
| Filing 114 Notice of Adoption by Yacht 87 LLC Related document: 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by MVP GROUP LLC, #89 MOTION to Dismiss 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 113 MOTION for Clerks Entry of Default as to Yacht 87 LLC by MVP GROUP LLC. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
|
Filing 112
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion for Substitution of Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant. #107 . Therein, Plaintiff requests that "attorneys David P. Milian, Esq., Jennifer M. Hernandez, Esq., and the law firm of Carey Rodriguez Milian, LLP, [be] substituted as counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Nahim Jorge Bonilla in place of Adam M. Ludwin, Esq., of Ludwin Law Group, P.A." #107 at 1. In addition, Plaintiff "requests that Adam M. Ludwin, Esq., and Ludwin Law Group, P.A. be relieved of further responsibility as counsel for Plaintiff." Id. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion #107 is GRANTED. Adam M. Ludwin, Esq. shall be relieved of all further responsibilities related to Plaintiff in these proceedings. The Clerk of the Court is INSTRUCTED to ADD David P. Milian, Esq., Jennifer M. Hernandez, Esq., and the law firm of Carey Rodriguez Milian, LLP as counsel for Plaintiff and REMOVE Adam M. Ludwin, Esq. as counsel for Plaintiff. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/30/2021. (elm)
|
| Filing 111 Corrected MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories by Simon Librati. Responses due by 10/13/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Proposed Order)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 110 MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories by Fusion Miami, LLC, Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC, Yacht 87 LLC. Responses due by 10/13/2021 (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 109 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Peter David Ticktin on behalf of Fusion Miami, LLC, Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC, Yacht 87 LLC (Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 108
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Stay Intervenor MVP Group, LLC's Amended Complaint #105 and Motion to Dismiss Defendant Simon Librati's Counterclaims or in the Alternative Motion for a More Definite Statement #106 filed on September 27, 2021. The Motions moot Plaintiff's Unopposed Renewed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Intervenor MVP Group, LLC's Amended Complaint in Intervention and Defendant Simon Librati's Counterclaim. #103 . Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motions, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Unopposed Renewed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Intervenor MVP Group, LLC's Amended Complaint in Intervention and Defendant Simon Librati's Counterclaim #103 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/28/2021. (tgr)
|
| Filing 107 STIPULATED MOTION for Substitution of Counsel. Substituting David P. Milian, Esq.; Jennifer M. Hernandez, Esq. for Adam M. Ludwin, Esq. by Nahim Jorge Bonilla, Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 10/12/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 106 MOTION TO DISMISS #77 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 10/12/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Executed Sales Agreement)(Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 105 MOTION TO DISMISS #81 Intervenor Complaint FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , MOTION to Stay ( Responses due by 10/12/2021) by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 104 MOTION to Strike Affirmative Defenses filed by Simon Librati by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 10/12/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 103 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to 94 Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer,,,,, by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 102 PAPERLESS NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF HEARING. In light of the Notice of Withdrawal #101 , the Hearing on the Second EXPEDITED MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF TRO AND TO PAY CASH BOND #99 is CANCELLED. (hwr) |
| Filing 101 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION by Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC re #99 Second EXPEDITED MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF TRO AND TO PAY CASH BOND re 95 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,,,, filed by Yacht 87 LLC (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 100 NOTICE of Hearing on Motion #99 Second EXPEDITED MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF TRO AND TO PAY CASH BOND. Motion Hearing set for 9/23/2021 02:00 PM in Miami Division before Judge K. Michael Moore. All Parties who wish to be heard on this matter shall appear in person. (hwr) |
| Filing 99 Second EXPEDITED MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF TRO AND TO PAY CASH BOND re 95 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,,,, by Yacht 87 LLC. (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 98 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 96 Order to Show Cause,,,, by Simon Librati, Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC. (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 97 FINAL MEDIATION REPORT by Herbert Stettin. Disposition: Case did not settle.(Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 96
PAPERLESS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On June 22, 2021, the Court issued the Paperless Order of Referral to Mediation, wherein the Court ordered the parties to complete mediation "within ninety (90) days." 54 . The Court further ordered that "[w]ithin five (5) days following the mediation conference, the mediator shall file a Mediation Report indicating whether all required parties were present. The report shall also indicate whether the case settled (in full or in part), was continued with the consent of the parties, or whether the mediator declared an impasse." Id. On July 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Scheduling Mediation, wherein Plaintiff notified the Court that mediation was scheduled for September 14, 2021. #64 ; see also #85 . To date, the Mediation Report has not been filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. Accordingly, the Parties are hereby ORDERED to show cause by September 22, 2021, why the Mediation Report has not been filed. Failure to do so may result in the imposition of sanctions. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/21/2021. (hwr)
|
|
Filing 95
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Yacht 87, LLC's ("Defendant") Renewed and Expedited Motion to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO") or in the Alternative to Permit Loan to be Made on the Vessel. #92 . Therein, Defendant argues that co-defendant Simon Librati ("Librati") "is at risk of defaulting on the purchase of a home for his family because of liquidity issues caused in large part by the TROs and the ongoing dispute with [Plaintiff] in multiple courthouses." Id. at 1. Specifically, Librati placed a $1,000,000.00 deposit on a home and has a second payment of $1,296,000.00 now overdue, with a "drop dead" deadline of September 27, 2021 after a cure period. Id. Defendant argues that Librati's "crisis could be resolved by obtaining a loan using the Vessel as collateral." Id. at 1-2. On June 23, 2021, the Court entered an Order modifying the terms of the TRO in this matter, as agreed by the Parties, "to allow the sale of the Vessel to a third-party provided the sale nets at least $1,000,000.00" and further providing that "Defendant shall post $1,000,000.00 to the Court's Registry subsequent to the sale of the Vessel, at which time Defendant may move the Court to dissolve the remaining terms of the TRO as it applies to the Vessel." 58 . The purpose of the requirement that Defendant pay $1,000,000.00 into the Court Registry upon sale of the Vessel, as was discussed during the June 11, 2021 hearing on this matter, was to provide security for Plaintiff's alleged interest in the Vessel. Now, Defendant seeks to usurp the terms of the TRO by seeking an Order that would, in effect, give a loan provider an interest in the Vessel, to Plaintiff's detriment and Librati's personal gain. The arguments set forth in the Motion are essentially the same as the arguments set forth in Defendant's initial motion to dissolve the TRO #48 , which the Court denied after a hearing and after further briefing as to agreed modifications. The only material difference is that Librati now has an immediate liquidity problem, which is not a sufficient basis to dissolve the TRO. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Renewed and Expedited Motion to Dissolve the TRO or in the Alternative to Permit Loan to be Made on the Vessel #92 is DENIED. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/21/2021. (hwr)
|
|
Filing 94
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Nahim Jorge Bonilla's ("Plaintiff") Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff-Intervenor's Amended Complaint in Intervention and Defendant Simon Librati's ("Librati") Amended Counterclaim. #91 . Therein, Plaintiff seeks a thirty (30) day stay of all pending deadlines in order for Plaintiff to procure replacement counsel, and argues that the contemporaneously filed Motion to Withdraw as Counsel #90 serves as good cause. Id. at 1-2. As noted in the Court's Order denying the Motion to Withdraw 93 , the Court cannot allow counsel to withdraw until Plaintiff secures replacement counsel. However, given that the deadlines for which Plaintiff now seeks an extension are rapidly approaching, the Court will grant a brief extension to the deadlines to respond to Plaintiff-Intervenor's Amended Complaint and Librati's Amended Counterclaim. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff-Intervenor's Amended Complaint in Intervention and Librati's Amended Counterclaim is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's responses shall each be due on or before September 27, 2021. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/21/2021. (hwr)
|
|
Filing 93
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Ludwin Law Group, P.A. and Adam M. Ludwin's ("Movants") Motion to Withdraw as Counsel. #90 . Therein, Movants move to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff Nahim Jorge Bonilla ("Plaintiff") due to irreconcilable differences. Id. Further, Movants request that Plaintiff be allowed thirty (30) days to retain new counsel. Id. It is within a district court's discretion to permit or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel. See Patnaude v. Sears Pest Control, Inc., No. 08-61980-CIV, 2009 WL 10667065, at *2 (S.D. Fla. May 13, 2009); Reagan v. TitleMax of Ala., Inc., No. 5:09-cv-91/RS-MD, 2010 WL 11530503, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 15, 2010) (citing Baker v. Coto, 154 F. App'x 854, 858 (11th Cir. 2005)). Here, this case is being actively litigated with both Parties having filed multiple expedited and/or emergency motions. Allowing counsel to withdraw before Plaintiff obtains replacement counsel will unnecessarily delay pending matters, as evidenced by Plaintiff's contemporaneously filed Motion for Extension of Time #91 , and potentially prejudice the interests of the Parties in this matter. The Court cannot allow Movants to withdraw as counsel until such time as suitable replacement counsel is found. Movants are officers of the Court and are this Court's means of communication with Plaintiff. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel #90 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Movants may refile their request to withdraw after Plaintiff has retained new counsel. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/21/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 92 Renewed EXPEDITED MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR IN ALTERNATIVE TO PERMIT LOAN TO BE MADE ON THE VESSEL re 58 Order on Expedited Motion,,,,,,,, by Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Exhibit, #14 Exhibit)(Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 91 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #77 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim, 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal or in the alternative a stay of all pending deadlines by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 90 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Adam Ludwin for / by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 10/4/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 89 MOTION to Dismiss 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal by Simon Librati, SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC. Responses due by 10/4/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Complaint in State Court Case, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B - Motion for Attachment in State Court Case, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C - Order in State court case)(Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 88 Summons Issued as to Fusion Miami, LLC, Mandrake Holdings, LLC. (pcs) |
| Filing 87 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) on FUSION MIAMI, LLC by MVP GROUP LLC re 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by MVP GROUP LLC (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 86 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) on MANDRAKE HOLDINGS, LLC by MVP GROUP LLC re 82 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal filed by MVP GROUP LLC (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 85 NOTICE by Nahim Jorge Bonilla Notice of Mediation (Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 84
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff-Intervenor MVP Group LLC's filing of an Amended Complaint in Intervention. #81 . The Amended Complaint in Intervention moots Defendant Sea-Era Charters, LLC's Motion to Dismiss Intervenor's Complaint #79 . UPON CONSIDERATION of the Amended Complaint in Intervention #81 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Sea-Era Charters, LLC's Motion to Dismiss Intervenor's Complaint #79 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 9/9/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 83 Clerks Notice to Filer re #81 Intervenor Complaint. Wrong Event Selected; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong event and failed to add all the parties from the Amended complaint. The document was re-docketed by the Clerk, see 82 . It is not necessary to refile this document. (pcs) |
| Filing 82 AMENDED INTERVENOR COMPLAINT against SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC, Simon Librati, Nahim Jorge Bonilla, Mandrake Holdings, LLC, Fusion Miami, LLC, Yacht 87 LLC, filed by MVP GROUP LLC. (See DE #81 for image). (pcs) |
| Filing 81 Amended Intervenor COMPLAINT , filed by MVP GROUP LLC.(Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 80 NOTICE by Yacht 87 LLC re #79 MOTION to Dismiss #68 Intervenor Complaint YACHT 87, LLCs NOTICE OF JOINDER IN DEFENDANT SEA-ERA CHARTERS, LLCS MOTION TO DISMISS INTERVENORS COMPLAINT (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 79 MOTION to Dismiss #68 Intervenor Complaint by SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC. Attorney Michael L. Cotzen added to party SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC(pty:intvd). Responses due by 9/15/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Complaint in State Court Case, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B - Motion for Attachment in State Court Case, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C - Order in State court case)(Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 78 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Simon Librati (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 77 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against All Plaintiffs by Simon Librati. (Ticktin, Peter) |
|
Filing 76
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Simon Librati's ("Defendant") Corrected Unopposed Motion for Leave to Amend the Answer to Add a Counterclaim. #74 . Therein, Defendant "seeks leave to file an Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaim against the Plaintiff, which arises from the same transaction or occurrence." Id. at 1. Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[a] party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within... 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f)." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Beyond that, "a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave" and "[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The decision whether to grant leave to amend is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Best Canvas Prods. & Supplies, Inc. v. Ploof Truck Lines, Inc., 713 F.2d 618, 622 (11th Cir. 1983). However, "[u]nless there is a substantial reason to deny leave to amend, the discretion of the district court is not broad enough to permit denial." Dussouy v. Gulf Coast Inv. Corp., 660 F.2d 594, 598 (5th Cir. 1981). Here, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff does not oppose the Motion. #74 at 2. The Court finds no substantial reason to deny leave to amend his Answer, and thus the Court will allow him to do so pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2). UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Corrected Unopposed Motion for Leave to Amend the Answer to Add a Counterclaim #74 is GRANTED. Defendant shall file the Amended Answer separately on the docket in this matter on or before August 31, 2021. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 8/30/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 75 Clerks Notice to Filer re #74 First MOTION to Amend/Correct #73 MOTION for Leave to File to Amend Answer to Add a Counterclaim . Login/Signature Block Violation; CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED - The name of attorney e-filing this document via their CM/ECF login does not match the name of attorney on the signature block of the document. The name used for login must match the typed name on signature block of the document. This filing is a violation of Section 3J(1) of CM/ECF Admin Procedures and Local Rule 5.1(b). Filer must File a Notice of Striking, then refile document pursuant to CM/ECF Admin Procedures and Local Rules. (pcs) |
| Filing 74 First MOTION to Amend/Correct #73 MOTION for Leave to File to Amend Answer to Add a Counterclaim by Simon Librati. Attorney Kendrick Almaguer added to party Simon Librati(pty:dft). Responses due by 9/10/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B)(Almaguer, Kendrick) |
| Filing 73 MOTION for Leave to File to Amend Answer to Add a Counterclaim by Simon Librati. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 72 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Peter David Ticktin on behalf of Simon Librati. Attorney Peter David Ticktin added to party Simon Librati(pty:dft). (Ticktin, Peter) |
| Filing 71 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #68 Intervenor Complaint with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by MVP GROUP LLC. SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC served on 8/11/2021, answer due 9/1/2021. (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 70 Summons Issued as to SEA-ERA CHARTERS LLC. (pcs) |
| Filing 69 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) by MVP GROUP LLC re #68 Intervenor Complaint filed by MVP GROUP LLC (Sheldon, Samuel) |
| Filing 68 Intervenor COMPLAINT , filed by MVP GROUP LLC.(Sheldon, Samuel) |
|
Filing 67
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon MVP Group LLC's ("Intervenor") Motion to Intervene. #66 . Therein, Intervenor moves to intervene in this action so that it may assert its claims against the Vessel at issue. See generally id. Rule 24(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "the court must permit anyone to intervene who... claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest." Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2). Here, Intervenor argues that Sea-Era Charters, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("SEC") purchased the Vessel with $444,240.00 of [Intervenor's] money, which funds were fraudulently transferred by Prime Med Group, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Prime Med") to SEC." #66 at 1. According to Intervenor, "Prime Med and SEC are related companies insofar as they are both owned and/or controlled by Plaintiff Nahim Jorge Bonilla... and Defendant Simon Librati." Id. at 2. Intervenor argues that it holds a superior interest in the Vessel, and thus "the sale of the Vessel and/or disposition of any sales proceeds in this action would, as a practical matter, impair or impede [Intervenor's] ability to protect its interest in the Vessel and the proceeds from the sale of same." Id. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Intervenor's Motion to Intervene #66 is GRANTED. Intervenor shall file its Intervening Complaint separately on the docket on or before August 6, 2021. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Intervenor shall participate in the mediation scheduled for September 14, 2021. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 8/4/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 66 MOTION to Intervene by MVP GROUP LLC. Attorney Samuel M. Sheldon added to party MVP GROUP LLC(pty:intvp). (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Sheldon, Samuel) |
|
Filing 65
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Simon Librati's ("Librati") Answer and Affirmative Defenses #30 , Defendant Sierra Drew Smebakken's ("Smebakken") Answer and Affirmative Defenses #31 , and Defendants Librati and Smebakken's Motion to Dismiss ("Mot.") #34 . Therein, Defendants Librati and Smebakken purport to answer Plaintiff's Complaint #1 , while simultaneously moving to dismiss the Complaint for failure to comply with conditions precedent. See generally Mot. "Rule 12(b) permits only sequential, not concurrent, filing of a motion to dismiss and an answer." BAC Home Loans Servicing LP v. Fall Oaks Farm LLC, 848 F. Supp. 2d 818, 822 (S.D. Ohio 2012); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) ("A motion asserting any of these defenses must be made before pleading if a responsive pleading is allowed."); see also Hand v. Houk, No. 07-CV-846, 2008 WL 5378358, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 23, 2008) ("[Rule 12(b)] does not envision that a motion to dismiss will be combined with an answer."). "A defendant must assert its Rule 12(b) defenses within its responsive pleading if it chooses not to first move the court for dismissal based upon those defenses; however, a defendant may not move the Court for dismissal based upon a Rule 12(b) defense within the responsive pleading itself." Quill Ink Books Ltd. v. ABCD Graphics & Design Inc., No. CIV-18-920-G, 2019 WL 510461, at *1 (W.D. Okla. Feb. 8, 2019). "Courts have read the filing requirements of Rule 12(b) strictly, and so deemed a motion filed contemporaneously with an answer as untimely, when the motion is a Rule 12(b)(6) motion; courts have given the filing requirements a more flexible interpretation, and so deemed a motion filed contemporaneously with an answer as timely, when the motion is made under Rule 12(b)(2)-(5). The implicit logic is sensible. There is more at stake in 12(b)(2)-(5) motions than in a 12(b)(6) motion. The defenses under 12(b)(2)-(5) are lost if not timely asserted; the grounds for dismissal under 12(b)(6) remain available throughout a case, albeit with a different name." Ins. Safety Consultants LLC v. Nugent, No. 15-CV-2183-B, 2017 WL 10701867, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 10, 2017) (citing FrenchPorte IP, LLC v. Martin Door Mfg., Inc., No. TDC-14-0295, 2014 WL 4094265, at *4 (D. Md. Aug. 14, 2014). Here, Defendants seeks dismissal of the Complaint for failure to comply with conditions precedent--namely, pre-suit mediation. See generally Mot. The Court construes the Motion to rely on 12(b)(6) as a basis for relief. See Kane Builders S & D, Inc. v. Md. CVS Pharmacy, LLC No. DKC 12-3775, 2013 WL 2948381, at *2 (D. Md. June 13, 2013) (finding that a party's failure to comply with an agreed upon condition precedent is properly considered under Rule 12(b)(6)). Thus, the Court strictly interprets the filing requirements of Rule 12(b). See Nugent, 2017 WL 10701867, at *1. Because Defendants filed their Answers and Affirmative Defenses concurrently, the Court accepts the filing "as an answer, denies the motion to dismiss component as untimely filed, and notes that [Defendants] remain free to raise its grounds for dismissal in a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings or later in the case." BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, 848 F. Supp. 2d at 823. Further, the Court notes that the Parties have since scheduled mediation in this matter, rendering the merits of the Motion otherwise moot. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss #34 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 7/27/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 64 NOTICE by Nahim Jorge Bonilla of Scheduling Mediation for September 14, 2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 63
PAPERLESS ORDER SCHEDULING TRIAL IN MIAMI. This case is now set for trial commencing the two-week trial period of March 14, 2022, at 9 a.m. in Courtroom 13-1, (thirteenth floor) United States Courthouse, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. All parties are directed to report to the calendar call on March 10, 2022, at 2 p.m., at which time all matters relating to the scheduled trial date may be brought to the attention of the Court. A final pretrial conference as provided for by Rule 16, Fed. R. Civ. P., and Rule 16.1(C), S.D. Fla. L.R., is scheduled for March 1, 2022, at 11 a.m. A bilateral pretrial stipulation and all other pretrial preparations shall be completed NO LATER THAN FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO THE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE. All motions to amend the pleadings or to join additional parties must be filed by the later of forty-five (45) days after the date of entry of this Order, or forty-five (45) days after the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant. Any and all pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment, Daubert motions, and motions in limine must be filed no later than eighty (80) days prior to the trial date. Responses to summary judgment motions must be filed no later than fourteen (14) days after service of the motion, and replies in support of the motion must be filed no later than seven (7) days after service of the response, with both deadlines computed as specified in Rule 6, Fed. R. Civ. P. Each party is limited to one Daubert motion. If all evidentiary issues cannot be addressed in a 20-page memorandum, the parties must file for leave to exceed the page limit. Each party is also limited to one motion in limine (other than Daubert motions). If all evidentiary issues cannot be addressed in a 20-page memorandum, the parties must file for leave to exceed the page limit. Rule 26(a)(2) expert disclosures shall be completed one hundred thirty (130) days prior to the date of trial. All discovery, including expert discovery, shall be completed one hundred (100) days prior to the date of trial. The failure to engage in discovery pending settlement negotiations shall not be grounds for continuance of the trial date. All exhibits must be pre-marked, and a typewritten exhibit list setting forth the number and description of each exhibit must be submitted at the time of trial. Plaintiff's exhibits shall be marked numerically with the letter "P" as a prefix. Defendant's exhibits shall be marked numerically with the letter "D" as a prefix. For a jury trial, counsel shall prepare and submit proposed jury instructions to the Court. The Parties shall submit their proposed jury instructions and verdict form jointly, although they do not need to agree on each proposed instruction. Where the parties do not agree on a proposed instruction, that instruction shall be set forth in bold type. Instructions proposed only by a plaintiff should be underlined. Instructions proposed only by a defendant should be italicized. Every instruction must be supported by citation to authority. The parties should use the Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions for Civil Cases as a guide, including the directions to counsel contained therein. The parties shall jointly file their proposed jury instructions via CM/ECF, and shall also submit their proposed jury instructions to the Court via e-mail at moore@flsd.uscourts.gov in WordPerfect or Word format. For a non-jury trial, the parties shall prepare and submit to the Court proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law fully supported by the evidence, which counsel expects the trial to develop, and fully supported by citations to law. The proposed jury instructions or the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law shall be submitted to the Court no later than five (5) business days prior to the scheduled trial date. Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit's Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three days of the conclusion of a trial or other proceeding, parties must file via CM/ECF electronic versions of documentary exhibits admitted into evidence, including photographs of non-documentary physical exhibits. The Parties are directed to comply with each of the requirements set forth in Administrative Order 2016-70 unless directed otherwise by the Court. THE FILING BY COUNSEL OF A "NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY" BY MOTION OR OTHERWISE IS NOT PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE LOCAL RULES AND SHALL NOT BE PRESUMED TO ALTER OR MODIFY THE COURT'S SCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 3/14/2022. (hwr)
|
| Filing 62 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 60 Order to Show Cause,,, by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 61 Joint SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 16.1 by Nahim Jorge Bonilla (Attachments: #1 Supplement)(Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 60
PAPERLESS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On April 27, 2021, the Court entered a Pretrial Order 13 requiring the Parties to file a joint scheduling report within ten (10) days of their joint scheduling conference, which was to be held "within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint." 13 . The Order cautioned that "[f]ailure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report within the deadlines set forth above may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorneys fees and costs." Id. The deadline for filing a joint scheduling report has passed and no extension of time has been requested. Accordingly, the Parties are hereby ORDERED to show cause by July 12, 2021 why a joint scheduling report has not yet been filed in this matter. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of the action. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 7/8/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 59 Joint NOTICE of Mediator Selection. Selected/Added Herbert Stettin as Mediator. (Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 58
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant 87 LLC's ("Defendant") Expedited Motion to Dissolve or Modify TRO and Request for Expedited Briefing. #48 . Therein, Defendant requests that the Court dissolve or modify the temporary restraining order ("TRO") #12 , #18 in this matter to either (1) allow for the sale of the Vessel at issue with an amount claimed by Plaintiff to be held in escrow, or (2) allow Defendant to post bond to obtain a release of all restrictions on the Vessel and sales proceeds. See generally id. Plaintiff filed a Response to Defendant's Motion #51 and Defendant filed a Reply #52 . On June 22, 2021, the Court ordered the Parties to show cause and clarify certain conditions that the Parties did not agree to in their briefs. 53 . The Parties filed responses on June 23, 2021. #56 , #57 . In their Joint Response #57 , the Parties aver that they agree to: (1) the Court modifying the TRO in this matter "to expressly allow the sale of the Vessel to a third-party provided that the sale nets at least $1,000,000.00"; (2) "the remainder of the TRO shall remain in effect against the sums to be deposited in the Court Registry until the Court permanently dissolves or modifies the TRO"; and (3) "Defendant will post $1,000,000.00 with the Court Registry subsequent to the sale of the Vessel." #57 at 2. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the terms set forth in the TRO #12 , #18 are hereby INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE and remain in effect, however the terms are MODIFIED to allow the sale of the Vessel to a third-party provided the sale nets at least $1,000,0000.00. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall post $1,000,000.00 to the Court's Registry subsequent to the sale of the Vessel, at which time Defendant may move the Court to dissolve the remaining terms of the TRO as it applies to the Vessel. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/23/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 57 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 53 Order to Show Cause,,,,, by Yacht 87 LLC. (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 56 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 53 Order to Show Cause,,,,, by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 55 REPLY to Response to Motion re #34 MOTION to Dismiss #1 Complaint, for Failure to Comply with Conditions Precedent and to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order filed by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker. (Cotzen, Michael) |
|
Filing 54
PAPERLESS ORDER OF REFERRAL TO MEDIATION. Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and Rule 16.2 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, it hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. All parties are required to participate in mediation. The mediation shall be completed within ninety (90) days, unless the Court grants an extension for good cause shown. 2. Plaintiffs' counsel, or another attorney agreed upon by all counsel of record and any unrepresented parties, shall be responsible for scheduling the mediation conference. The parties are encouraged to avail themselves of the services of any mediator on the List of Certified Mediators, maintained in the office of the Clerk of this Court, but may select any other mediator. The parties shall agree upon a mediator and file a Notice of Mediator Selection within fifteen (15) days from the date of this Order. If there is no agreement, lead counsel shall file a request for the Clerk of Court to appoint a mediator in writing within fifteen (15) days from the date of this Order, and the Clerk shall designate a mediator from the List of Certified Mediators. Designation shall be made on a blind rotation basis. 3. The parties shall agree upon a place, date, and time for mediation convenient to the mediator, counsel of record, and unrepresented parties and file a Notice of Scheduling Mediation no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. If the parties cannot agree to a place, date, and time for the mediation, they may motion the Court for an order dictating the place, date, and time. 4. The presence of counsel and each party or representatives of each party with full authority to enter in a full and complete compromise and settlement, either in person or via videoconference, is mandatory. If insurance is involved, an adjuster with authority up to the policy limits or the most recent demand, whichever is lower, shall attend. 5. All discussions, representations and statements made at the mediation conference shall be confidential and privileged. 6. At least ten (10) days prior to the mediation date, all parties shall present to the mediator a brief written summary of the case identifying issues to be resolved. Copies of those summaries shall be served on all other parties. 7. The Court may impose sanctions against parties and/or counsel who do not comply with the attendance or settlement authority requirements herein, or who otherwise violate the terms of this Order. The mediator shall report non-attendance and may recommend imposition of sanctions by the Court for non-attendance. 8. The mediator shall be compensated in accordance with the standing order of the Court entered pursuant to Rule 16.2.B.6, or on such basis as may be agreed to in writing by the parties and the mediator selected by the parties. The cost of mediation shall be shared equally by the parties unless otherwise ordered by the Court. All payments shall be remitted to the mediator within 30 days of the date of the bill. Notice to the mediator of cancellation or settlement prior to the scheduled mediation conference must be given at least two (2) full business days in advance. Failure to do so will result in imposition of a fee for one hour. 9. If a full or partial settlement is reached in this case, counsel shall promptly notify the Court of the settlement in accordance with Local Rule 16.2.F, by filing a notice of settlement signed by the counsel of record within ten (10) days of the mediation conference. Thereafter, the parties shall forthwith submit an appropriate pleading concluding the case. 10. Within five (5) days following the mediation conference, the mediator shall file a Mediation Report indicating whether all required parties were present. The report shall also indicate whether the case settled (in full or in part), was continued with the consent of the parties, or whether the mediator declared an impasse. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/22/2021. (hwr) Corrected typo per chambers on 6/23/2021 (mf).
|
|
Filing 53
PAPERLESS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant 87 LLC's ("Defendant") Expedited Motion to Dissolve or Modify TRO and Request for Expedited Briefing. #48 . Plaintiff filed a Response to Defendant's Motion #51 and Defendant filed a Reply #52 . While the Parties appear to agree in principle to the allow the sale of the Vessel in exchange for Defendant posting $1,000,000.00 security, the briefs filed are unclear and the Parties do not appear to agree on (1) whether and when the terms of the TRO should be dissolved, which would necessarily have to occur to permit sale of the Vessel, and (2) whether Defendant shall secure and post in the Court's Registry a $1,000,000.00 bond in advance of the sale of the Vessel or whether Defendant will post in the Court's Registry $1,000,000.00 subsequent to the sale of the Vessel using funds received therefrom. The Parties are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by 2:00 PM on June 23, 2021, whether a $1,000,000.00 bond posted into the Court's Registry is agreeable in exchange for the dissolution of the TRO, which will permit Defendant to sell the Vessel. Additionally, Plaintiff is ORDERED to clarify whether Plaintiff seeks to have a continued lien, mortgage, or other interest in the Vessel after the proposed sale takes place, and if so, on what legal grounds. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/22/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 52 REPLY to Response to Motion re #48 EXPEDITED MOTION TO DISSOLVE OR MODIFY TRO AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING re 47 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief,,,,, Order on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order,,,, filed by Yacht 87 LLC. (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 51 RESPONSE to Motion re #48 EXPEDITED MOTION TO DISSOLVE OR MODIFY TRO AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING re 47 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief,,,,, Order on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order,,,, filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Replies due by 6/25/2021. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 50 RESPONSE in Opposition re #34 MOTION to Dismiss #1 Complaint, for Failure to Comply with Conditions Precedent and to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Replies due by 6/23/2021. (Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 49
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant 87 LLC's ("Defendant") Expedited Motion to Dissolve or Modify TRO and Request for Expedited Briefing. #48 . Therein, Defendant argues that "Defendants incur significant monthly costs totaling tens of thousands of dollars of maintenance and upkeep on the Vessel," which "drain funds that may be available to both Defendants and Plaintiff upon conclusion of this litigation" and which "are injurious to Defendants' finances... as a proximate cause of the Court's TRO." Id. at 6. The Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida provide that "[t]he Court may, upon written motion and good cause shown, waive the time requirements of [] Local Rule [7.1(c)] and grant an immediate or expedited hearing on any matter requiring such expedited procedure." S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(d). UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Parties shall comply with the following expedited briefing schedule: Plaintiff's response to Defendant's Motion to Dissolve or Modify TRO #48 shall be due on or before June 18, 2021; Defendant's reply to Plaintiff's response shall be due on or before June 21, 2021. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/15/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 48 EXPEDITED MOTION TO DISSOLVE OR MODIFY TRO AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING re 47 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief,,,,, Order on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order,,,, by Yacht 87 LLC. (Naughton, Clay) |
|
Filing 47
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Yacht 87 LLC's ("Defendant") Amended Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO") #38 and Plaintiff's Motion to Extend TRO #40 . On June 11, 2021, the Court held a hearing on the motions and heard from both Plaintiff and Defendant on the matter. 46 . For the reasons discussed at the hearing, the Court finds good cause to extend the terms of the TRO. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motions, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Amended Motion to Dissolve TRO #38 is DENIED and Plaintiff's Motion to Extend TRO #40 is GRANTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the terms set forth in the initial TRO #12 and supplemental TRO #18 , are hereby INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE and remain in effect until further notice. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/11/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 46 PAPERLESS Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge K. Michael Moore: Motion Hearing held on 6/11/2021. Total time in court: 1 hour. Attorney Appearance(s): Adam Michael Ludwin for Plaintiff; Clay Michael Naughton for Defendant Yacht 87 LLC. Court Reporter: Sharon Velazco, 305-523-5636 / Sharon_PellVelazco@flsd.uscourts.gov. (hwr) |
|
Filing 45
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants Simon Librati and Sierra Drew Smebakken's ("Defendants") Unopposed Motion to Attend Hearing by Zoom or Telephone. #44 . Therein, Defendants request that the Court permit their counsel to attend the upcoming hearing scheduled on Defendant Yacht 87, LLC's Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO") either via Zoom or telephone because Defendants' counsel is traveling in North Carolina with family and is unable to appear in person. Id. at 2. Defendants argue that "[w]hile it is not clear at this time whether undersigned counsel will participate in arguing the Motion, given that the movant is Defendant Yacht 87, LLC, counsel for Defendants does want the opportunity to observe and possibly attend." Id. On June 8, 2021, the Court denied the Parties' joint motion requesting similar accommodations. 42 . Additionally, given the exigency of circumstances presented by the Parties in their respective motions to either continue or dissolve the TRO, all Parties who wish to present an argument on the merits of the motions at issue may do so by appearing in person. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion to Appear to Attend Hearing by Zoom or Teleconference #44 is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/9/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 44 MOTION to attend hearing by zoom or telephone by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker. (Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 43 NOTICE by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker of Joinder of #38 Amended Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order (Cotzen, Michael) Modified to link to document on 6/10/2021 (pcs). |
|
Filing 42
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Parties' Joint Motion for Continuance of Hearing Scheduled for June 8, 2021 at 1:00 PM and for the Hearing to Be Conducted via Zoom. #41 . Therein, the Parties request that the Court reset the hearing on Defendant Yacht 87 LLC's Amended Motion to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order, and permit the Parties to appear by Zoom, because Plaintiff's counsel and counsel for Defendants Librati and Smebakken are out of town on vacation. Id. at 1. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Parties' Joint Motion #41 is DENIED. NOTICE of Hearing on #38 AMENDED MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER and #40 MOTION TO EXTEND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. Motion Hearing reset for 6/11/2021 10:00 AM in Miami Division before Chief Judge K. Michael Moore, United States Courthouse, Courtroom 13-1, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/8/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 41 MOTION to Continue re 39 Notice of Hearing on Motion, filed by Nahim Jorge Bonilla, Simon Librati, John Doe, Sierra Drew Smebakker, Yacht 87 LLC by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 6/21/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 40 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 6/21/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 39 NOTICE of Hearing on #38 AMENDED MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. Motion Hearing set for 6/8/2021 01:00 PM in Miami Division before Chief Judge K. Michael Moore, United States Courthouse, Courtroom 13-1, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida. (hwr) |
| Filing 38 AMENDED MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER re #12 Order on Emergency Motion with Certification of Emergency by Yacht 87 LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit EX 1 Assignment of Monies, #2 Exhibit EX 2 INCOMING WIRE - Buyer Proceeds (8.31.20) (2), #3 Exhibit EX 3 Note, Mortgage and Related Documents, #4 Exhibit EX 4 Correspondence Librati-Bonilla, #5 Exhibit EX 5 Email Correspondence from Andrew High dated 22321, #6 Exhibit EX 6 March 8 2021 Correspondence, #7 Exhibit EX 7 Correspondence from High to Novela 31621, #8 Exhibit EX 8 2021 April 2 Executed Assignment of Preferred Mortgage, #9 Exhibit EX 9 Email Singerman and Lundwin 4.28.21, #10 Exhibit EX 10 Re Yacht 87 LLC adv. Bonilla.msg, #11 Exhibit EX 11 Correspondence Naughton and Ludwin 52721)(Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 37 MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER re #12 Order on Emergency Motion with Certification of Emergency by Yacht 87 LLC. (Naughton, Clay) |
|
Filing 36
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the filing of a Notice of Unavailability. #32 . Therein, counsel for Defendants Simon Librati and Sierra Drew Smebakken ("Defendants") informs the Court that Defendants' counsel will be unavailable on the following dates: June 5, 2021 through June 18, 2021, and July 14, 2021 through July 24, 2021. Id. Defendants' counsel requests that "nothing be scheduled and no deadlines occur" on those days. Id. Neither the Local Rules nor the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorize the filing of a Notice of Unavailability. If a party wishes to move a hearing, trial or other deadline set by the Court, an appropriate motion must be filed. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Notice of Unavailability, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED that the Notice of Unavailability is STRICKEN. The Clerk of the Court is INSTRUCTED to STRIKE the Notice of Unavailability #32 from the docket. The Notice shall not be presumed to alter or modify any Court deadlines. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 6/3/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 35 Clerks Notice to Filer re #33 Defendant's MOTION to Adopt/Join #22 Response in Opposition to Motion for Injunction. Wrong Event Selected; ERROR - The Filer selected the wrong event. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document. (pcs) |
| Filing 34 MOTION to Dismiss #1 Complaint, for Failure to Comply with Conditions Precedent and to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker. Responses due by 6/16/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A (Operating Agreement))(Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 33 Defendant's Joinder to #22 Response in Opposition to Motion for Injunction by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker. (Cotzen, Michael) Modified text on 6/3/2021 (pcs). |
| Filing 32 STRICKEN PER DE 36.NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY by Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker for dates of June 5, 2021-June 18, 2021; July 14, 2021 - July 24, 2021 (Cotzen, Michael) Modified on 6/3/2021 (lbc). |
| Filing 31 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand by Sierra Drew Smebakker. (Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 30 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand by Simon Librati. (Cotzen, Michael) |
| Filing 29 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael L. Cotzen on behalf of Simon Librati, Sierra Drew Smebakker. Attorney Michael L. Cotzen added to party Simon Librati(pty:dft), Attorney Michael L. Cotzen added to party Sierra Drew Smebakker(pty:dft). (Cotzen, Michael) |
|
Filing 28
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Third Renewed Emergency Motion to Modify Order Granting Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief and to Extend the [sic], which is in effect a motion to extend a Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO") #12 and Supplemental TRO #18 previously issued by the Court. #27 . On April 26, 2021, in response to Plaintiff's Motion #10 , the Court entered a TRO enjoining Defendants from removing the subject vessel at issue in this action from the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Florida, and requiring Defendants to provide access to or produce documents regarding Sea-Era Charters, LLC's ("SEC") financial condition and other business dealings. #12 . On April 30, 2021, in response to Plaintiff's subsequent Motion #17 , the Court entered a Supplemental TRO enjoining Defendants and John Doe noteholder from transferring their interests in or related to the subject vessel, and enjoining John Doe noteholder from commencing a foreclosure upon the preferred ship mortgage. #18 . On May 14, 2021, in response to Plaintiff's subsequent Motion #20 , the Court extended the terms set forth in both TROs, #12 and #18 , for fourteen days. On May 24, 2021, Defendant John Doe noteholder, now identified as Yacht 87 LLC, filed a notice of appearance and a response opposing the TROs. #22 , 23 , #26 . Defendant Yacht 87 LLC presents the Court with a different picture, as compared to Plaintiff's Complaint, of which Parties have made various payments towards the subject vessel's mortgage, and which Parties are responsible for outstanding payments due. See generally #22 . Defendant Yacht 87 LLC argues that the Court's TROs "unfairly prevents Yacht 87 LLC from exercising its property rights." Id. at 2. Defendant Yacht 87 LLC acknowledges that it is "beneficially owned, at least in part, by Mr. Librati--a Defendant who has not yet appeared in this matter. Id. at 2. On May 25, 2021, summonses were returned executed on the remaining Defendants in this matter, Simon Librati ("Librati") and Sierra Drew Smebakker ("Smebakker"). #24 , #25 . While Librati and Smebakker have not yet appeared, their answers to the Complaint are due June 10, 2021. Now, Plaintiff moves the Court for an additional extension of the TROs for fourteen (14) days. See generally #27 . Plaintiff argues that "Yacht 87 LLC has failed to provide any evidence supporting [its] claim as the current note-holder/mortgagee for the vessel, and thus standing to appear in the instant action." #27 at 3. Further, Plaintiff argues that Defendant Librati "began marketing the vessel for sale through Denison Yachts" approximately two and a half weeks ago. Id. at 4. Based on Plaintiff's assertion that the subject vessel is actively being marketed for sale, despite this Court's Orders clearly restricting Defendants from doing so, the Court finds that Plaintiff has shown good cause to extend the TROs. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion #27 for an extension of the Court's TROs is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. It is FURTHER ORDERED that (1) the terms set forth in both TROs, #12 and #18 , are hereby INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE and remain in effect for fourteen (14) days from the date of this Paperless Order; (2) should Plaintiff wish to further extend the terms of the TROs, a motion shall be filed on or before June 7, 2021; and (3) any such forthcoming motion will be referred to Magistrate Judge Lauren F. Louis, who shall hold a hearing in the matter with all Parties present on or before the expiration of the TRO. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/28/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 27 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included by Nahim Jorge Bonilla. Responses due by 6/11/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Text of Proposed Order)(Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 26 Notice of Entry of Parties Listed on 23 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer - Attorney, into CM/ECF. NOTE: New Filer(s) will appear twice, since they are also a new party in the case. New Filer(s)/Party(s): Yacht 87 LLC and Yacht 87 LLC.. Attorney Clay Michael Naughton added to party Yacht 87 LLC(pty:dft). (Naughton, Clay) |
| Filing 25 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. SIERRA DREW SMEBAKKER served on 5/20/2021, answer due 6/10/2021. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 24 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint, with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. SIMON LIBRATI served on 5/20/2021, answer due 6/10/2021. (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 23 Clerks Notice to Filer re #22 Response in Opposition to Motion. Parties/Mediator Not Added; ERROR - The Filer failed to add all parties from the complaint/petition/removal, etc. or the mediator. Filer is instructed to file a Notice of Entry of Parties Listed into CM/ECF and add the additional parties/mediator. (pcs) |
| Filing 22 RESPONSE in Opposition re #19 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included filed by John Doe. Attorney Clay Michael Naughton added to party John Doe(pty:dft). Replies due by 6/1/2021. (Naughton, Clay) |
|
Filing 21
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order #12 and Supplement #18 . On April 26, 2021, in response to Plaintiff's Motion #10 , the Court entered a Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO") enjoining Defendants from removing the subject vessel at issue in this action from the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Florida, and requiring Defendants to provide access to or production of documents regarding Sea-Era Charters, LLC's ("SEC") financial condition and other business dealings. #12 . On April 30, 2021, in response to Plaintiff's subsequent Motion #17 , the Court entered a Supplemental TRO enjoining Defendants and John Doe noteholder from transferring their interests in or related to the subject vessel, and enjoining John Doe noteholder from commencing a foreclosure upon the preferred ship mortgage. #18 . Now, Plaintiff moves the Court for an extension of the TROs for fourteen (14) days. See generally #19 . Plaintiff argues that his process servers have reported making eleven (11) unsuccessful attempts to serve process, with anyone answering the door at Defendants' residence refusing service. Id. at 3-4. Further, an attorney purportedly representing Defendants advised Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant Simon Librati has created a new company, Yacht 87 LLC, that purchased the note and mortgage for the subject vessel. Id. at 4; [20-1]. Plaintiff argues that a search of the State of Florida's Division of Corporations website shows that Yacht 87 LLC is not a legal entity and is not registered to conduct business within the State of Florida. #19 at 4-5; [20-2]. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff has shown good cause to extend the TROs. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order #12 and Supplement #18 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the terms set forth in both TROs, #12 and #18 , are hereby INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE and remain in effect for fourteen (14) days from the date of this Paperless Order. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/14/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 20 SUPPLEMENT to #19 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 19 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. Responses due by 5/28/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 18
ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART #17 Emergency Motion with Certification of Emergency. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/30/2021. See attached document for full details. (hwr)
|
| Filing 17 Renewed EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included to Modify Temporary Restraining Order by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. Responses due by 5/14/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Text of Proposed Order)(Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 16
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Modify Order Granting Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief. #15 . Therein, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter an order (1) temporarily enjoining Defendants from transferring any interest in or relating to M/Y "Sea Era" ("Subject Vessel"); (2) temporarily enjoining the John Doe noteholder from transferring any interest in or relating to the Subject Vessel; (3) temporarily enjoining the John Doe noteholder from commencing a foreclosure upon the preferred ship mortgage; (4) permitting Plaintiff to take exclusive possession of and relocate the Subject Vessel, provided that it remain within the Court's jurisdiction; (5) temporarily enjoining Defendants from accessing the Subject Vessel; and (6) granting Plaintiff "entitlement for legal fees associated with [the instant] Motion." Id. at 7. Local Rule 7.1(a) provides that "[e]very motion when filed and served shall incorporate a memorandum of law citing supporting authorities." Rule 7.1(a), S.D. Fla. L.R. Further, "any motion seeking emergency or ex parte relief or a temporary restraining order[] shall be accompanied by a proposed order that is filed and [] submitted via e-mail to the Court as prescribed by Section 3I(6) of the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures." Id. Here, Plaintiff's Motion is not accompanied by a proposed order, but more importantly, the Motion fails to cite any legal authority in support of the relief sought. See generally #15 . Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Modify Order Granting Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief #15 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/29/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 15 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included to Modify Preliminary Injunction by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. Responses due by 5/13/2021 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(Ludwin, Adam) |
|
Filing 14
PAPERLESS ORDER REFERRING PRETRIAL DISCOVERY MATTERS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE LAUREN FLEISCHER LOUIS. PURSUANT to 28 U.S.C. 636 and the Magistrate Rules of the Local Rules of the Southern District of Florida, the above-captioned Cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis to take all necessary and proper action as required by law with respect to any and all pretrial discovery matters. Any motion affecting deadlines set by the Court's Scheduling Order is excluded from this referral, unless specifically referred by separate Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall comply with Magistrate Judge Lauren Fleischer Louis' discovery procedures. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/27/2021. (hwr)
|
|
Filing 13
PAPERLESS PRETRIAL ORDER. This order has been entered upon the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is hereby ORDERED to forward to all defendants, upon receipt of a responsive pleading, a copy of this Order. It is further ORDERED that S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1 shall apply to this case and the parties shall hold a scheduling conference no later than twenty (20) days after the filing of the first responsive pleading by the last responding defendant, or within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint, whichever occurs first. However, if all defendants have not been served by the expiration of this deadline, Plaintiff shall move for an enlargement of time to hold the scheduling conference, not to exceed 90 days from the filing of the Complaint. Within ten (10) days of the scheduling conference, counsel shall file a joint scheduling report. Failure of counsel to file a joint scheduling report within the deadlines set forth above may result in dismissal, default, and the imposition of other sanctions including attorney's fees and costs. The parties should note that the time period for filing a joint scheduling report is not tolled by the filing of any other pleading, such as an amended complaint or Rule 12 motion. The scheduling conference may be held via telephone. At the conference, the parties shall comply with the following agenda that the Court adopts from S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1: (1) Documents (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.1 and 2) - The parties shall determine the procedure for exchanging a copy of, or a description by category and location of, all documents and other evidence that is reasonably available and that a party expects to offer or may offer if the need arises. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(B). (a) Documents include computations of the nature and extent of any category of damages claimed by the disclosing party unless the computations are privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C). (b) Documents include insurance agreements which may be at issue with the satisfaction of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(D). (2) List of Witnesses - The parties shall exchange the name, address and telephone number of each individual known to have knowledge of the facts supporting the material allegations of the pleading filed by the party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(A). The parties have a continuing obligation to disclose this information. (3) Discussions and Deadlines (S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.B.2) - The parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case. Failure to comply with this Order or to exchange the information listed above may result in sanctions and/or the exclusion of documents or witnesses at the time of trial. S.D. Fla. L.R. 16.1.I. Pursuant to Administrative Order 2016-70 of the Southern District of Florida and consistent with the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit's Local Rules and Internal Operating Procedures, within three days of the conclusion of a trial or other proceeding, parties must file via CM/ECF electronic versions of documentary exhibits admitted into evidence, including photographs of non-documentary physical exhibits. The Parties are directed to comply with each of the requirements set forth in Administrative Order 2016-70 unless directed otherwise by the Court.Telephonic appearances are not permitted for any purpose. Upon reaching a settlement in this matter the parties are instructed to notify the Court by telephone and to file a Notice of Settlement within twenty-four (24) hours. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/27/2021. (hwr)
|
|
Filing 12
ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART #10 Emergency Motion with Certification of Emergency. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/26/2021. See attached document for full details. (hwr)
|
| Filing 11 Summons Issued as to SIERRA DREW SMEBAKKER. (lbc) |
| Filing 10 EMERGENCY MOTION with Certification of Emergency included for Temporary Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. Responses due by 5/10/2021 (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA re 7 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case, Summons(es) (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA re 3 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case of filing Civil Cover Sheet (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Ludwin, Adam) |
| Filing 7 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Summons(es) cannot be issued. The party(ies) on the summons(es) does not match the initiating documents. (drz) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to SIMON LIBRATI. (drz) |
| Filing 5 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Alias Not Added. The Filer failed to add the alias information for the party(ies). The correction was made. It is not necessary to re-file this document. (drz) |
| Filing 4 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Party(ies) Improperly Formatted. The Filer failed to enter the party name(s) in accordance with the CM/ECF Format for Adding Parties for Attorneys Guide. The correction was made. It is not necessary to re-file the document. (drz) |
| Filing 3 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. No Civil Cover Sheet. Filer is instructed to file a Notice (Other) with the Civil Cover Sheet attached within 24 hours of the notice. (Image Blank) (drz) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Chief Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Lauren F. Louis is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (drz) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Injunctive, Declaratory and Other Equitable Relief against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-14633014, filed by NAHIM JORGE BONILLA. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Affidavit, #14 Summon(s), #15 Summon(s))(Ludwin, Adam) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
