in the united states bankruptcy court for...

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

RICHMOND DIVISION

In re:

Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC, a

Virginia professional limited liability company,

et al.,

Debtors.1

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Chapter 11

Case No. 15-33370

(Joint Administration)

MOTION OF CREDITOR DUSTIN JOHNSON

FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER CONTINUING FOR 60 DAYS THE

MOTION TO EXTEND THE AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO

SECTIONS 105(A) AND 362 OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE AND

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT THEREOF

Creditor Dustin Johnson, by his undersigned counsel, files this motion (“Motion for

Reconsideration”) seeking reconsideration of the Order Continuing for 60 Days the hearing on

the Debtors’ Motion to Extend the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Sections 105(a) and 362 of the

Bankruptcy Code.2 The Court has extended the automatic stay to Mark H. Wittstadt (“M.

Wittstadt”) and Gerard Wm. Wittstadt (“G. Wittstadt” and together with M. Wittstadt, the

“Wittstadts”), preventing creditor Dustin Johnson from moving forward with his lawsuit against

the Wittstadts personally, without any corresponding safeguards to protect Mr. Johnson’s claims

for $4 million. Moreover, despite the Debtors and the Wittstadts claiming that their devotion of

significant time and resources to the bankruptcy case should relieve them from having to litigate

Mr. Johnson’s case, Debtor Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC is nevertheless proceeding with

1 The Debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number,

are: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC (1651), Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, PLLC (1589), Wittstadt

Title & Escrow Company, L.L.C. (3831), Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC (1589), MSWLAW, Inc. (6994),

Teays Valley Trustees, LLC (9830), and York Trustee Services, LLC (8058).

2 See Docket No. 59.

Case 15-33370-KLP Doc 194 Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Main Document of 9

2

and has not sought to stay its state court case in Fulton County, Georgia against Nathan

Hardwick IV and other defendants.

To prevent manifest injustice, Mr. Johnson requests that the Court condition the

extension of the automatic stay on: a) an agreement by the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during

the pendency of the extended automatic stay, or a requirement that the Wittstadts post a $4

million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral); and b) the submission of sworn testimony

from the Wittstadts as to the as to the time and resources they are contributing to the Debtors

during the stay, which may be tested by Mr. Johnson through cross examination. In support of

the Motion for Reconsideration, Mr. Johnson respectfully states as follows:

BACKGROUND

1. The Wittstadts are equity partners in the law firm of Debtor Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ

Wittstadt, LLC (the “Morris Firm”). The Wittstadts and the Morris Firm have been Mr.

Johnson’s lawyers since September 27, 2011.

2. Mr. Johnson is the victim of a fraudulent scheme crafted by the Morris Firm and

the Wittstadts whereby they obtained $3,000,000 from Mr. Johnson (with the promise to pay

back $4,000,000) for the purpose of keeping the Morris Firm afloat following the discovery that

millions of dollars of escrowed client funds had been misappropriated. A detailed description of

the facts and circumstances related to the Wittstadts’ scheme is set forth in the Objection to the

Debtors’ Motion for Extension of the Automatic Stay, filed on July 24, 2015.3

3. To recover his funds, Mr. Johnson commenced litigation in United States District

Court on around October 28, 2014 (the “Johnson Litigation”).4 He has asserted claims against


4 Mr. Johnson’s lawsuit is captioned as Dustin Johnson v. Morris Schneider Wittstadt, LLC fka Morris Hardwick

Schneider, LLC, MSLAW, Inc. fka MHSLAW, Inc., Nathan Hardwick IV, Esq., Mark Wittstadt, Esq., and Gerard


3

the Morris Firm, and the Wittstadts individually, for breach of oral/implied contract, fraud,

breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, money had and received, conversion/trover, among other

claims. Mr. Johnson was directed to wire $3,000,000 into an account entitled “Equity Partners

Account.” Accordingly, it is inconceivable that the Wittstadts (two of three equity partners) are

not liable to Mr. Johnson.

4. On July 5, 2015, during the pendency of the Johnson Litigation, the Debtors filed

voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code, 11 U.S.C. §§

101, et seq. (the “Bankruptcy Code”).5 The Debtors continue to operate their businesses and

property as debtors-in-possession in accordance with Bankruptcy Code Sections 1107 and 1108.

Neither of the Wittstadts has filed for individual bankruptcy protection.

5. On July 6, 2015, the Debtors filed a motion seeking entry of an order pursuant to

Sections 105(a) and 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, and Bankruptcy Rule 9007, extending the

automatic stay to certain of the Debtors’ members, managers, and employees, including the

Wittstadts (“Motion for Stay”).6

6. On July 7, 2015, the Court entered an interim order granting the Debtors’ Motion

for Stay pending a final hearing on the matter, which the Court set for July 31, 2015 (“Interim

Order”).7 The Interim Order specifically stayed the Johnson Litigation against the Wittstadts.

7. On July 31, 2015, the Court entered an Order extending the stay of the Johnson

Litigation against the Wittstadts to October 1, 2015 (the “July 31 Order”).8

Wm. Wittstadt Jr., Esq., Civil Action No. 2014-CV-252435, pending in the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division (the “Johnson Litigation”).

5 See Docket No. 1.

6 See Docket No. 5.




4

RELIEF REQUESTED

8. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e), applicable in bankruptcy pursuant to FED. R.

BANKR. P. 9023, Mr. Johnson moves this Court to reconsider and modify the July 31 Order to

condition the stay of the Johnson Litigation (as the stay relates to the Wittstadts) on the

following: a) an agreement by the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during the pendency of the

extended automatic stay, except as necessary to pay day-to-day expenses, or require the

Wittstadts to post a $4 million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral); and, b) a reporting by

the Debtors and Wittstadts under oath, through a declaration or live testimony, as to the time and

resources the Wittstadts are contributing to the Debtors during the stay (which Johnson may test

through cross examination), and a finding by the Court that such contributions are adding value.

BASIS FOR RELIEF

9. Bankruptcy Rule 9023, incorporating Civil Rule 59, provides that the Court may

alter or amend a judgment, such as the July 31 Order, upon timely motion by a party. “[Civil]

Rule 59(e) grants bankruptcy courts license to reconsider orders and judgments after their entry.”

See Ellenberg v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. Sys. Of Georgia (In the Matter of Midland

Mechanical Contractors, Inc.), 200 B.R. 453, 456 (Bankr. N.D.Ga. 1996); See also FED. R. CIV.

P. 59(E); FED. R. BANKR. P. 9023 (references in Civil Rule 59(e) to the alteration or amendment

of a “judgment” shall be read to include reconsideration of an order appealable to an appellate

court. See Midland Mechanical, 200 B.R. at 456).

10. A party may move for reconsideration of orders issued by bankruptcy courts

within the 14 days of the entry of an order or judgment. See FED. R. CIV. P. 59(E); FED. R. CIV. P.

9023. A court should grant a motion for reconsideration when the moving party shows one of

three criteria: (1) there is newly available evidence; (2) there is an intervening change in the

controlling law; or (3) there is a need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice.


5

See Pacific Life Ins. Co. v. Am. Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 148 F.3d 396, 403 (4th Cir. 1998). See also

Wolff v. Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp., 2004 WL 2204018 (4th Cir. 9/30/04) (copy attached);

Matter of Prince, 85 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. 1996); Lony v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 935 F.2d

604, 608 (3d Cir. 1991). Motions for reconsideration serve a valuable function in those limited

situations in which they are appropriate. Above the Belt, Inc. v. Mel Bohannan Roofing, Inc., 99

F.R.D. 99 (E.D. Va. 1983).

ARGUMENT

11. In the instant case, reconsideration and modification of the July 31 Order is

necessary to prevent manifest injustice to Mr. Johnson. Specifically, the Court should modify

the July 31 Order to ensure the Wittstadts do not hide, conceal or abscond with assets while the

collection efforts of Mr. Johnson are held in abeyance.

12. The relief granted to the Wittstadts in the July 31 Order is extraordinary and

unusual. Generally, the automatic stay is available only to a debtor, and not third party

defendants or co-defendants. Lynch v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 710 F.2d 1194, 1197 (6th

Cir. 1983); A.H. Robins Co., v. Piccinin, 788 F.2d 994, 999 (4th Cir. 1986); Kreisler v.

Goldberg, 478 F.3d 209, 213 (4th Cir. 2007).

13. As a limited exception to that general rule, the Fourth Circuit has recognized that

a stay may be extended to cover non-debtor defendants in “unusual circumstances,” but only if

the court “weigh[s] competing interests,” “maintain[s] an even balance,” and “justif[ies] the stay

by clear and convincing circumstances outweighing potential harm to the party against whom it

is operative.” Robins, 788 F.2d at 1003 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)

(emphasis added). Excluded from the “unusual circumstances” exception are cases in which the

non-bankrupt co-defendant is “independently liable” to the creditor. CAE Indus. Ltd. v.


6

Aerospace Holdings Co., 116 B.R. 31, 33 (S.D.N.Y. 1990); Variable-Parameter Fixture Dev.

Corp. v. Morpheus Lights, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 603, 608 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).

14. The July 31 Order does not provide any protections to Mr. Johnson against

actions by the Wittstadts to hide, conceal or transfer their assets. Mr. Johnson submits that, at a

minimum, the Court should condition the July 31 Order on an agreement by the Wittstadts to

freeze their assets, except for the payment of necessary day-to-day expenses, or require the

Wittstadts to post a $4 million bond (or provide other sufficient collateral). Without such an

assurance, the Wittstadts will be granted free reign to transfer property and dissipate assets while

Mr. Johnson’s collection efforts are entirely stayed. Such harm would be irreparable.

15. In addition, in their Motion for Stay, the Debtors claim that “unusual

circumstances” exist because, in part, the Wittstadts must devote substantial time and resources

to the Debtors’ bankruptcy cases. However, neither the Wittstadts nor the Debtors have

presented any evidence as to the extent, nature or value of the Wittstadts’ purported contributions

since the filing of the Debtors’ cases in early July. At a minimum, the Wittstadts should be

required to report, either through live testimony or a sworn declaration, as to what they are doing

for the Debtors and whether such contributions are adding any value. Mr. Johnson requests that

the Court condition the July 31 Order on the submission of such evidence by the Wittstadts and

permit Johnson to test such evidence through cross examination.

16. Mr. Johnson submits that the request to condition the July 31 Order is reasonable

and necessary to prevent manifest injustice, and that any added burdens on the Wittstadts are far

outweighed by the potential of irreparable harm and prejudice to Mr. Johnson. The Wittstadts

should not be permitted to utilize the extension of the automatic stay as a means to frustrate


7

further Mr. Johnson’s collection efforts without providing corresponding security to ensure that

Mr. Johnson is not harmed during the pendency of the stay.

17. For these reasons, Mr. Johnson submits that ample cause exists for the Court to

reconsider and modify the July 31 Order to condition the stay of the Johnson Litigation on: a) an

agreement from the Wittstadts to freeze their assets during the pendency of the extended

automatic stay, except as necessary for the payment of day-to-day expenses, or require the

Wittstadts to post of a $4 million bond (or provide some other sufficient collateral); and, b) a

showing that the Wittstadts are contributing value to the Debtors, which showing may be tested

by Johnson through cross examination.

18. There is another troubling aspect to the continued extension of the automatic stay

to the Wittstadts and the Debtors’ request on July 31 for the automatic stay to be extended to

Nathan Hardwick, a former equity holder of the Debtors and a defendant in the Johnson

litigation. The Debtors argued that discovery being served in connection with Johnson’s case

against Hardwick, which is not stayed, would distract the Debtor and the Wittstadts from their

efforts to stabilize the Debtors in the early stages of their chapter 11 cases. The Debtors further

argued that they likely could not afford to respond to discovery. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy

of the docket sheet for Morris Hardwick Schneider, LLC (now known as Morris Schneider

Wittstadt) and Landcastle Title, LLC v. Nathan E. Hardwick, IV and Divot Holdings, LLC,

Superior Court of the State of Georgia, Fulton County, Case No. 2014CV250583. In that case,

one the Debtors is proceeding against Mr. Hardwick. Nothing in the docket reflects a

notification to the Superior Court of the filing of these chapter 11 cases or the imposition of the

automatic stay. Indeed, that case is proceeding normally, with discovery apparently ongoing.

Debtors’ and the Wittstadts’ representations to the Court that participation in Mr. Johnson’s case


8

would be too burdensome and expensive should be viewed in light of their apparent willingness

to proceed in a case in which a Debtor is a plaintiff, but not in which a Debtor is a defendant.

NOTICE AND HEARING

19. Notice of this Motion for Reconsideration has been provided in accordance with

the Notice, Case Management and Administrative Procedures approved by this Court on July 16,

2015.9 Mr. Johnson submits that no other or further notice need be provided.

20. Mr. Johnson believes it is in the best interest of all parties for the Motion for

Reconsideration to be heard at the hearing scheduled for August 27, 2015, at 1:00 p.m.

WAIVER OF MEMORANDUM OF LAW

21. Mr. Johnson respectfully requests that this Court treat this Motion for

Reconsideration as a written memorandum of points and authorities or waive any requirement

that this Motion for Reconsideration be accompanied by a written memorandum of points and

authorities as described in Local Bankruptcy Rule 9013-1(G).

NO PRIOR REQUEST

22. No previous motion for the relief sought herein has been made to this or any other

Court.



9

CONCLUSION

Mr. Johnson respectfully requests that the Court reconsider and modify and condition the

July 31 as set forth herein, and award Mr. Johnson such other and further relief as may be just

under the circumstances.

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

/s/ Devin J. Stone________________

Devin J. Stone, Esq.

VA Bar No. 88323.

Suite 500

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 289-1313

Facsimile: (202) 289 1330

[email protected]

John W. Mills

(pro hac vice)

Prominence in Buckhead

3475 Piedmont Road, NE

Suite 1700

Atlanta, Georgia 30305-3327

Telephone: (404) 264-4030

Facsimile: (404) 264-4033

[email protected]

Attorneys for Creditor/Plaintiff

Dustin Johnson


Skip to Main Content Logout My Account Search Menu All Case Records Search Refine Search Back Location : All-Superior Help

REGISTER OF ACTIONSCASE NO. 2014CV250583

MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC AND LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLCVS. NATHAN E. HARDWICK, IV.; DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC, AND JOHN DOE1-10

Case Type: DAMAGESDate Filed: 08/25/2014

Location: Business Court 3Judicial Officer: JUDGE, BUSINESS COURT

SB176 Case Cross ReferenceNumber:

0602014072053

PARTY INFORMATION

AttorneysDEFENDANT DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC Matthew D Daley

Retained3151 MAPLE DR NEATLANTA, GA 30305

404-262-2225(W)

DEFENDANT HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV. Matthew D DaleyRetained

3151 MAPLE DR NEATLANTA, GA 30305

404-262-2225(W)

DEFENDANT JOHN DOE 1-10

PLAINTIFF LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC Jeffrey Hobart SchneiderRetained

3500 LENOX ROAD4TH FLOOR, ONE ALLIANCECENTERAtlanta, GA 30326

404-926-4500(W)

Edward Davison Burch, Jr.Retained

1230 PEACHTREE STREET,N.E.SUITE 3100, PROMENDADE IIATLANTA, GA 30309-3592

404-815-3500(W)

PLAINTIFF MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC Jeffrey Hobart SchneiderRetained

3500 LENOX ROAD4TH FLOOR, ONE ALLIANCECENTERAtlanta, GA 30326

404-926-4500(W)

Edward Davison Burch, Jr.Retained

1230 PEACHTREE STREET,N.E.SUITE 3100, PROMENDADE IIATLANTA, GA 30309-3592

404-815-3500(W)

EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT

OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS08/05/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE08/05/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

Page 1 of 3

8/13/2015http://justice.fultoncountyga.gov/PASupCrtCM/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=6805023

Case 15-33370-KLP Doc 194-1 Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Exhibit(s) Page 1 of 3

07/06/2015 CERTIFICATE06/16/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE05/28/2015 ORDER05/28/2015 SCHEDULING ORDER05/01/2015 ORDER OF TRANSFER05/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE04/29/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE04/10/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE04/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE04/01/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE03/06/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE03/04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

Party: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLCParty: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.Party: JOHN DOE 1-10

03/04/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICEParty: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLCParty: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.Party: JOHN DOE 1-10





02/12/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParty: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC

02/10/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParty: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLC

02/02/2015 CERTIFICATE01/26/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Party: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC01/22/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Party: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLCParty: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.

01/09/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE01/09/2015 LEAVE OF ABSENCE01/05/2015 ANSWER

Party: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.01/05/2015 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Party: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLCParty: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.

12/23/2014 OTHERParty: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC

12/22/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIMEParty: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLCParty: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC

12/18/2014 LEAVE OF ABSENCE12/15/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME

Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLCParty: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLC

10/07/2014 NON EST SERVICEParty: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC

10/01/2014 AMENDMENT09/19/2014 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME09/18/2014 NON EST SERVICE09/11/2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE

Party: DIVOT HOLDINGS, LLCParty: HARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV.Party: JOHN DOE 1-10

09/10/2014 CONSENT ORDER09/02/2014 LEAVE OF ABSENCE08/28/2014 CANCELED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer WRIGHT, CYNTHIA)

ISSUE RESOLVED08/28/2014 NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL08/28/2014 RULE NISI08/25/2014 PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION

Party: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLCParty: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLCParty: Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart

08/25/2014 Request for ServiceHARDWICK, NATHAN E., IV. UnservedDIVOT HOLDINGS, LLC Unserved

Page 2 of 3



08/25/2014 CASE INITIATION FORMParty: LANDCASTLE TITLE, LLCParty: MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLCParty: Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

PLAINTIFF MORRIS HARDWICK SCHNEIDER, LLCTotal Financial Assessment 420.00Total Payments and Credits 420.00Balance Due as of 08/13/2015 0.00

08/25/2014 Transaction Assessment 216.0008/25/2014 Transaction Assessment 196.0008/25/2014 Payment Receipt # 2014-15328 Schneider, Jeffrey Hobart (412.00)09/22/2014 Transaction Assessment 8.0009/22/2014 Payment Receipt # 2014-17018 SANDS ANDERSON (8.00)

Page 3 of 3



IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

RICHMOND DIVISION

In re:

Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC, a

Virginia professional limited liability company,

et al.,

Debtors.1

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Chapter 11

Case No. 15-33370

(Joint Administration)

NOTICE OF MOTION OF CREDITOR DUSTIN JOHNSON

FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER CONTINUING FOR 60 DAYS THE

MOTION TO EXTEND THE AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO

SECTIONS 105(A) AND 362 OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on August 14, 2015, Creditor Dustin Johnson, by his

undersigned counsel, filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Continuing for 60 days the

Motion to Extend the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Sections 105(a) and 362 of the Bankruptcy

Code (“Motion”). The Motion is being served simultaneously with this Notice.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT in connection with these cases, the

Order Establishing Certain Notice, Case Management and Administrative Procedures (the “Case

Management Order”) was entered by the Court on July 15, 2015, which, among other things,

prescribes the manner in which objections must be filed and served and when hearings will be

conducted. A copy of the Case Management Order may be obtained at no charge at

www.upshotservices.com/MSW or for a fee via PACER at http://www.vaeb.uscourts.gov/.

1 The Debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number,

are: Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt Va., PLLC (1651), Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, PLLC (1589), Wittstadt

Title & Escrow Company, L.L.C. (3831), Morris ǀ Schneider ǀ Wittstadt, LLC (1589), MSWLAW, Inc. (6994),

Teays Valley Trustees, LLC (9830), and York Trustee Services, LLC (8058).

Case 15-33370-KLP Doc 194-2 Filed 08/14/15 Entered 08/14/15 15:50:27 Desc Notice Page 1 of 4

2

Your rights may be affected. You should read these papers carefully and discuss

them with your attorney, if you have one in these bankruptcy cases. (If you do not have an

attorney, you may wish to consult one). Under the Case Management Order, unless a

written response to the Application is filed with the Clerk of Court and served on the

moving party within three (3) days prior to the next scheduled Omnibus Hearing Date, the

Court may deem any opposition waived, treat the Application as uncontested, and issue an

order granting the relief requested therein.

Accordingly, if you do not want the Court to grant the relief sought in the Application,

then on or before August 24, 2015, you must file with the Court, either electronically or at the

address shown below, a written response pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 2014-1. If you mail

your response to the Court for filing, you must mail it early enough so the Court will receive it

on or before the date stated above.

_X_ Electronically file with the Court, at the address shown below, a written response

with supporting memorandum pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rules 2014-1 and 9013-1(H). You

must mail or otherwise file it early enough so the Court will receive it on or before the due date

identified herein.

Clerk of the Court

United States Bankruptcy Court

701 E. Broad Street, Suite 4000

Richmond, VA 23219

_X_ In accordance with the Case Management Order, you or your attorney must also

serve a copy of your written objection upon the undersigned as well as on the Core Group and


3

the 2002 List, as such terms are defined in the Case Management Order so that the documents

are received on or before the due date identified herein.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT to the extent a timely objection is filed,

on August 27, 2015 at 1:00 p.m., (or such time thereafter as the matter may be heard) the

undersigned will appear before The Honorable Keith L. Phillips, United States Bankruptcy

Judge, in Room 5100 of the United States Courthouse, 701 East Broad Street, Richmond,

Virginia 23219, and will move the Court for entry of an order approving the Application.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT If you or your attorney do not take the

steps required in this Notice, the Court may deem any opposition waived, treat the Applications

as conceded, and issue orders granting the requested relief without further notice or hearing.

PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

/s/ Devin J. Stone________________

Devin J. Stone, Esq.

VA Bar No. 88323.

Suite 500

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 289-1313

Facsimile: (202) 289 1330

[email protected]

John W. Mills

(admitted pro hac vice)

Prominence in Buckhead

3475 Piedmont Road, NE

Suite 1700

Atlanta, Georgia 30305-3327

Telephone: (404) 264-4030

Facsimile: (404) 264-4033


4

[email protected]

Attorneys for Creditor/Plaintiff

Dustin Johnson


in the united states bankruptcy court for...

Documents