New Bankruptcy Opinion: CAREFREE WILLOWS, LLC v. AG/ICC WILLOWS LOAN OWNER, LLC – Dist. Court, D. Nevada, 2015

Carefree Willows, LLC, Appellant


AG/ICC Willows Loan Owner, LLC, Appellee.

Case No. 2:15-cv-581-JAD.

United States District Court, D. Nevada.

May 13, 2015.

Order Granting Appellant’s Motion to Reassign [Doc. 10]

JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.

Appellant Carefree Willows LLC moves for reassignment of this bankruptcy appeal to U.S. District Judge Richard F. Boulware, II, who currently presides over four appeals from the same bankruptcy matter. [1] Carefree argues that reassignment will result in greater efficiency as both this case and the four related appeals involve the same property, concern the same bankruptcy reorganization case, and involve similar questions of law. [2]

Local Rule 7-2.1 permits consolidation of cases under a single district judge when the cases are sufficiently related. Under this rule, cases are related if:

(a) Both actions involve the same parties and are based on the same or similar claim;

(b) Both actions involved the same property, transaction or event;

(c) Both actions involve similar questions of fact and the same question of law and their assignment to the same district judge and/or magistrate judge is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort, either because the same result should follow in both actions or otherwise; or,

(d) For any other reason, it would entail substantial duplication of labor if the actions were heard by different district judges or magistrate judges. The assigned judges will make a determination regarding the consolidated of the actions.

Upon review of the matters in question, I agree that a similar set of predicate facts underlies each appeal and that each appeal arises form the same proceedings in bankruptcy court in relation to the same bankruptcy case; assignment to a single district judge should foster more efficient appellate proceedings in the district court in terms of time, money, and judicial resources. Thus, the motion to reassign is granted.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Carefree’s Motion to Re-Assign Appeal [Doc. 10] is GRANTED. This case is reassigned to the Hon. Richard F. Boulware, II for all further proceedings.

[1] Doc. 10. These cases are: 14-cv-654-RFB; 14-cv-656-RFB; 14-cv-637-RFB; and 14-cv-652-RFB.

[2] Id. at 2.

Save trees – read court opinions online on Google Scholar.


Leave a Reply