Free Order - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 50.4 kB
Pages: 2
Date: March 20, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 330 Words, 2,100 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/7706/15.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Delaware ( 50.4 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Delaware
Case 1 :04-cv—00354-GIVIS Document 15 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
In re: )
)
INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES, )
INC., et al., ) Bankruptcy Case N0. 00-389 (MFW)
) (Chapter ll)
Debtors. )

)
C. TAYLOR PICKETT, )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) C.A. N0. 04-354 (GMS)
)
INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES, )
INC., )
)
Appellee. )

ORDER
WHEREAS the above-captioned appeal arises from a dispute over the proper ownership of
a country club membership in Maryland;
WHEREAS on January 9, 2004, the bankruptcy court issued an order and a written opinion
denying the appellant’s motion for summary judgment, and granting the appellee’s cross motion for
summary judgment;
WHEREAS on February 2, 2004, the bankruptcy court granted the appellant’s motion to
reconsider;
WHEREAS on February I3, 2004, the appellant filed a second motion for summary
judgment;
WHEREAS on April 19, 2004, the bankruptcy court denied the second motion for summary
judgment and reaffirmed the opinion and order of January 9;
WHEREAS the appellant argues to this court that the bankruptcy court erred in concluding
that (I) the appellee had not assigned the country club membership to the appellant, (2) the appellant
had previously waived his claim against the appellee, (3) the appellant’s rights to the membership
are not superior to the rights of the appellee’s successor in interest, and (4) the doctrines of judicial

Case 1 :04-cv—00354-GIVIS Document 15 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 2 of 2
and equitable estoppel do not apply; and
WHEREAS after carefully reviewing the record on appeal, as well as the briefs ofthe parties,
the court holds that the bankruptcy court’s order of April 19 was the proper disposition regarding the
outstanding motions.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
The bankmptcy cou1t’s order of April 19, 2004, be AFFIRMED.
Dated: March [Q , 2006 'I "
S TES DISTRICT JUDGE
2

Case 1:04-cv-00354-GMS

Document 15

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-00354-GMS

Document 15

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 2 of 2