Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Aetna Motion to Obtain Access to papers in Garlock bankruptcy

Aetna Motion to Obtain Access to papers in Garlock bankruptcy

Ratings: (0)|Views: 121 |Likes:
Published by Kirk Hartley
Aetna Motion to Obtain Access to papers in Garlock bankruptcy
Aetna Motion to Obtain Access to papers in Garlock bankruptcy

More info:

Published by: Kirk Hartley on Feb 27, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/28/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 1
WCSR 31957548v1
 
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION IN RE: ) CASE NO. 10-31607 ) GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ) CHAPTER 11 ) DEBTOR. )
 ________________________________________________)
MOTION FOR ACCESS TO RULE 2019 STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS
Aetna, Inc. (“Aetna”) and The Rawlings Company LLC (“Rawlings”) (collectively, the “Movants”) hereby move for an Order granting them access to the Rule 2019 Statements and accompanying exhibits filed on behalf of asbestos claimants in the above-captioned case. On March 16, 2012, this Court entered an Order requiring that Rule 2019 Statements and exhibits be filed, and directing that such statements and accompanying exhibits may be accessed  by those “who obtain a Court order authorizing access.”
 1
 This motion seeks such access. The Rule 2019 Statements and related exhibits are public records. Under well-established principles of common law, as well as Section 107 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Movants are entitled to review them unless an objecting party can demonstrate that disclosure will cause a “clearly defined and serious injury.”
2
 No such showing can be made here. Since no  potential objector could make the showing necessary to overcome the presumption in favor of access, the Court should grant the present motion and allow the Movants to review the Rule 2019 Statements and exhibits.
1
 See
 
Revised Order Requiring Filing of Statements Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2019, In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC., No. 10-31607 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. Mar. 16, 2012) [ECF No. 2037] (hereinafter the “Garlock 2019 Order”).
2
 Goldstein v. Forbes (In re Cendant Corp.), 260 F.3d 183, 194 (3d Cir. 2001) (“Broad allegations of harm,  bereft of specific examples or articulated reasoning, are insufficient.”).
Case 10-31607 Doc 3350 Filed 02/19/14 Entered 02/19/14 09:27:16 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 16
 
 2
WCSR 31957548v1
 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.
 
This Court has jurisdiction over this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334. This matter is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A). Venue is proper in this Court  pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1409(a). The statutory predicates for the relief requested herein are 11 U.S.C. § 107(a) and Rule 2019 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2.
 
Aetna is a health plan incorporated in Connecticut with its principal place of  business in Hartford, Connecticut. Aetna provides private healthcare coverage to 17,875,230  people in 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. 3.
 
Rawlings is a limited liability company organized under the laws of Kentucky with its principal place of business in LaGrange, Kentucky. Rawlings is the nation’s largest  provider of cost-containment services to health plans (together with Aetna, the “Health Plans”), serving many of the nation’s largest Health Plans which cover a substantial majority of the nation’s privately insured population. Rawlings’ primary services involve subrogation and coordination of benefits on behalf of Health Plans, assisting Health Plans in identifying and recovering claims that they have initially paid, but are the responsibility of a third party. 4.
 
The Health Plans have provided millions of dollars of medical benefits to tens of thousands of plan members to treat their asbestos-related diseases. Many of these plan members have asserted personal injury claims against a wide variety of defendants. On information and  belief, these defendants include the Debtor. 5.
 
The Health Plans have subrogation rights directly against tortfeasors, including the Debtor, for their members’ health care expenses. Through subrogation, a portion of the members’ claims being asserted against the Debtor, namely that portion seeking reimbursement of medical expenses, rightfully belongs to the Health Plans. The Health Plans are the rightful
Case 10-31607 Doc 3350 Filed 02/19/14 Entered 02/19/14 09:27:16 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 16
 
 3
WCSR 31957548v1
 holders of that part of each claim asserted by the covered member-creditors listed in the Rule 2019 statements. The Health Plans also have reimbursement rights against plan members who are compensated by tortfeasors for their injuries in suit, from trusts, or otherwise. 6.
 
The Movants seek access to the public records filed with the Court, but not made available on the electronic docket. The Movants want to determine the full extent of their subrogation and reimbursement rights as to asbestos-related personal-injury claims brought against the Debtor.
3
 7.
 
Rule 2019 of the Bankruptcy Code requires an entity, other than a committee appointed by a bankruptcy court, to file a verified statement with the court identifying, among other things, the creditor or creditors represented.
4
 8.
 
This Court has entered an Order requiring any entity representing more than one creditor to file a Rule 2019 Statement.
5
 Pursuant to that Order, Rule 2019 Statements filed on  behalf of asbestos claimants must include an attached Excel spreadsheet listing each claimant’s name, home address, partial social security number, and disease type.
6
 This exhibit is filed with the clerk in electronic form on compact disc.
7
 The Court’s electronic docket records the date of the filing, along with an indication that the exhibits are available to “those who obtain a Court order authorizing access.”
8
 
3
 While the Movants can obtain claimant names from the Schedule F filed at the commencement of the case, there is no other identifying information associated with such claimants. For example, the address listed in Schedule F is that of the claimant’s law firm, not the residential address of the claimant. Also, individuals whose claims arose after the Schedule F was filed would not be listed.
4
 F
ED
.
 
R.
 
B
ANKR 
.
 
P. 2019(a). Rule 2019 has recently been amended to relax the requirement to disclose  passive representation. See amended Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2019(a) (eff. Dec. 1, 2011). However, such amendment is irrelevant to this motion, as the events at issue took place under the prior version of Rule 2019. See, e.g.
 ,
In re Motions for Access of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, 488 B.R. 281, 299 (D. Del. 2013).
5
 See
 
Garlock 2019 Order, at pp. 2-4.
6
 Id.
 ,
 ¶ 2(a)-(g).
7
 Id.
 ,
 p. 2.
8
 
 Id 
., p. 2.
Case 10-31607 Doc 3350 Filed 02/19/14 Entered 02/19/14 09:27:16 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 16

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->