On December 29, 2010, HSP filed a Complaint to Determine Dischargeability of Debtagainst Porter and Stoltz.
HSP’s Complaint to Determine Dischargeability of Debt was filed against Batiste on December 30, 2011.
In addition, HSP filed proofs of claim in the Porter and Stoltz cases.
HSP’s Dischargeabiltiy actions, Massachusetts Suit, all third party demands, and allcounterclaims were substantively consolidated on February 23, 2011.
On October 18, 2011,Debtors filed a Second Amended and Superseding Counterclaim.
On October 20, 2011, theComplaints were set for trial on February 13, 2012.
What followed can only be described as contentious pretrial litigation. Seventeen (17)motions to compel discovery, for sanctions, to strike, to extend deadlines, or for protective relief were filed, opposed and heard. Seven (7) additional motions for summary judgment,
and to exclude experts were heard immediately before trial. The pretrial litigation forced the resettingof the case for trial on the merits four (4) times. The merits were heard on July 13 through 22 and September 13 through 28, 2012. All parties affirmatively consented to trial on the merits and entryof a final judgment as to all issues before this Court.
Case No. 10-13553, P-56; Case No. 10-13554, P-34.
Case No. 11-13158, P-19.
Proof of Claim (“POC”) No. 11 (Porter) and POC No. 2 (Stoltz).
Initially, HSP’s demand included a request for jury trial. HSP voluntarily waived that request, agreeingto proceed in this Court.