Classification |
Original Proceedings - Circuit Civil - Certiorari
|
Court |
4th District Court of Appeal
|
Originating Court |
Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County
CACE 18-003766 (07)
|
Parties
Name |
LEXINGTON LION WESTON I, LP
|
Role |
Petitioner
|
Status |
Active
|
Representations |
Brian Spes Dervishi
|
|
Name |
RYDER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
|
Role |
Petitioner
|
Status |
Active
|
|
Name |
RYDER TRUCK RENTAL, INC.
|
Role |
Petitioner
|
Status |
Active
|
|
Name |
GOLD COAST FREIGHTWAYS, INC.
|
Role |
Respondent
|
Status |
Active
|
|
Name |
Philip J. Von Kahle
|
Role |
Respondent
|
Status |
Active
|
Representations |
KEVIN M. ECKHARDT, STEVEN L. BEILEY, CRYSTAL B. CARSWELL, Ryan Clancy, THEODORE A. STEVENS, ALEXIS S READ, Michael B. Stevens
|
|
Name |
Hon. Jack B. Tuter
|
Role |
Judge/Judicial Officer
|
Status |
Active
|
|
Name |
Clerk - Broward
|
Role |
Lower Tribunal Clerk
|
Status |
Active
|
|
Docket Entries
Docket Date |
2019-04-23
|
Type |
Disposition by Order
|
Subtype |
Dismissed
|
Description |
Order-Original Proceeding Dismissed ~ ORDERED that, having considered Petitioners’ response to this Court’s order to show cause, and respondent Gold Coast Freightways, Inc.’s reply, the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed for failure to establish irreparable harm or a departure from the essential requirements of law. Petitioners fail to identify any clearly established law that permits a creditor to conduct discovery in a Chapter 727 proceeding. Petitioners do not show how they are materially injured as they may bring a fraudulent transfer action if the Assignee abandons such claims in the Chapter 727 proceeding. See Smith v. Effective Teleservices, Inc., 133 So. 3d 1048, 1052 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).WARNER, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-23
|
Type |
Disposition
|
Subtype |
Dismissed
|
Description |
Dismissed - Order by Judge
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-12
|
Type |
Record
|
Subtype |
Appendix
|
Description |
Appendix ~ (AMENDED)
|
On Behalf Of |
Philip J. Von Kahle
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-12
|
Type |
Order
|
Subtype |
Order Striking Filing
|
Description |
Order Striking Appendix - Non-Compliance With R. 9.220 ~ ORDERED that the respondent's appendix to the reply to response is stricken as not in compliance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.220(c), which was amended effective October 1, 2017, in that it was not properly indexed and consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as page 1, was not paginated so that the page numbers displayed by the PDF reader exactly match the pagination of the index, and was not bookmarked in compliance with Rule 9.220(c)(3). An amended appendix in compliance with Rule 9.220(c) shall be filed within two (2) days from the date of this order.
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-10
|
Type |
Response
|
Subtype |
Reply to Response
|
Description |
Reply to Response
|
On Behalf Of |
Philip J. Von Kahle
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-10
|
Type |
Record
|
Subtype |
Appendix
|
Description |
Appendix
|
On Behalf Of |
Philip J. Von Kahle
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-02
|
Type |
Order
|
Subtype |
Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Reply to Response
|
Description |
Grant EOT to Reply to Response ~ ORDERED that respondents’ April 1, 2019 motion for extension of time is granted and the time for filing a reply to the response is extended until April 11, 2019.
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-04-01
|
Type |
Motions Extensions
|
Subtype |
Motion for Extension of Time
|
Description |
Motion for Extension of Time ~ TO FILE REPLY TO RESPONSE
|
On Behalf Of |
Philip J. Von Kahle
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-25
|
Type |
Response
|
Subtype |
Response
|
Description |
Response
|
On Behalf Of |
LEXINGTON LION WESTON I, LP
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-25
|
Type |
Record
|
Subtype |
Appendix
|
Description |
Appendix ~ (SUPPLEMENTAL)
|
On Behalf Of |
LEXINGTON LION WESTON I, LP
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-13
|
Type |
Order
|
Subtype |
Order to File Response
|
Description |
ORD-To File Response ~ ORDERED that, within ten (10) days of this order, Petitioners shall file a response with this Court and explain why this proceeding should not be dismissed as moot and/or for failure to establish irreparable harm. According to Petitioners, “[t]he Assignee announced that he has ‘no objection to the proposed document discovery so long as this discovery is conducted at the sole expense of the [Petitioners] with copies of all documents to be produced by [Petitioners] to the Assignee without expense to the Assignment Estate.’” Petitioners represent that ““[they] have agreed with the Assignee to conduct discovery pursuant to the subpoenas at their own expense and share the results with the Assignee.” If this is so, Petitioners appear to have an adequate remedy. They can pay the Assignee’s expenses for conducting the discovery, obviating any need for this Court to issue an extraordinary writ. The Respondents may file a reply within ten (10) days of the response.
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-07
|
Type |
Letter
|
Subtype |
Acknowledgment Letter
|
Description |
Writ of Certiorari / Acknowledgment letter
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-06
|
Type |
Petition
|
Subtype |
Petition Certiorari
|
Description |
Petition for Certiorari Filed ~ **FEE PAID THROUGH PORTAL**
|
On Behalf Of |
LEXINGTON LION WESTON I, LP
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-06
|
Type |
Record
|
Subtype |
Appendix to Petition
|
Description |
Appendix to Petition ~ **FEE PAID THROUGH PORTAL**
|
|
Docket Date |
2019-03-06
|
Type |
Misc. Events
|
Subtype |
Case Filing Fee Paid through Portal
|
Description |
Case Filing Fee Paid Through Portal
|
|
|