Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gaynor v. Miller

United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Knoxville

November 7, 2016

KENNETH GAYNOR, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DELOY MILLER, et al., Defendants. MARCIA GOLDBERG, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DELOY MILLER, et al., Defendants. LEWIS COSBY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DELOY MILLER, et al., Defendants. GABRIEL R. HULL, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DELOY MILLER, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          C. Clifford Shirley, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

         This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Rules of this Court, Standing Order 13-02, and the referral Orders of the Chief District Judge.

         Now before the Court are the following Motions by case:

1. Gaynor v. Miller, 3:15-cv-545. Plaintiff's Motion for Order Deeming Defendant Gerald Hannah's Served, or in the alternative, to Extend Time to Serve, and Memorandum in Support Thereof [Doc. 54]; Defendants' Motion and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Consolidation of Related Actions [Doc. 62]; and Stipulated Briefing Scheduling Regarding Underwriter Defendants' Motion for Consolidation of Related Actions [Doc. 66].
2. Goldberg v. Miller, 3:15-cv-546: Plaintiff's Motion for Order Deeming Defendant Gerald Hannah's Served, or in the alternative, to Extend Time to Serve, and Memorandum in Support Thereof [Doc. 55]; Defendants' Motion and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Consolidation of Related Actions [Doc. 62]; and Stipulated Briefing Scheduling Regarding Underwriter Defendants' Motion for Consolidation of Related Action [Doc. 66].
3. Cosby v. Miller, 3:16-cv-121: Joint Motion for Scheduling Order [Doc. 11] and Motion for Appointment of Co-Lead Plaintiffs and Approval of Their Selection of Lead Counsel [Doc. 11].
4. Hull v. Miller, 3:16-cv-232: Joint Motion to Postpone Responsive Pleading Deadline [Doc. 45], Defendants' Motion and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support of Consolidation of Related Actions [Doc. 61], and Stipulated Briefing Scheduling Regarding Underwriters Defendants' motion for Consolidation of Related Actions [Doc. 63].

         By way of background, the Court ruled these cases to be related. In two of these cases, Gaynor and Goldberg, the Plaintiffs filed Motions to Remand. The Court held the above Motions in abeyance until the Chief District Judge ruled on the Motions to Remand. The District Judge denied the Motions to Remand on September 8, 2016.

         The parties appeared before the Court on October 25, 2016, for a status conference with respect to the above motions. Attorneys Stephen Astley and Al Holifield were present on behalf of the Plaintiffs in Gaynor, Goldberg, and Hull.[1] Attorneys Paul Davidson and Tera Murdock were present on behalf of Defendant KPMG, LLP. Attorneys Stephen Marcum and Robert Weber (via telephone) were present on behalf of Defendants Bob Gower, Catherine Rector, David Hall, Deloy Miller, Don Turkleson, Joseph Leaery, Marceau Schlumberger, and Merrill McPeak. Attorneys Margaret Keeley and Jeffery Yarbro were present on behalf of Defendants Aegis Capital Corporation, Dominick & Dominick, LLC, I-Bankers Securities, Inc., Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc., MLV & Co., LLC, Maxim Group, LLC, National Securities Corporation, Northland Capital Markets, and Williams Financial Group. Finally, Defendant Scott Boruff attended the hearing on behalf of himself.

         With respect to the Motions for Order Deeming Defendant Gerald Hannah's Served that were filed in Gaynor [Doc. 54] and Goldberg [Doc. 55], Plaintiffs' counsel reported that he would work with Defendant Hannahs's attorney to attempt to resolve the issue. The Court ORDERED Plaintiffs' counsel to report to the Court within one week as to whether the issue had been resolved or whether the Court's involvement was necessary.[2]

         With respect to consolidation, the parties agreed that Gaynor, Goldberg, and Hull should be consolidated but not Cosby. In addition, the parties agreed that Gaynor should serve as the lead case. The Court finds that Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules permits the Court to consolidate cases that present common questions of law or fact. The Court finds that Gaynor, Goldberg, and Hull present common questions of law and fact, and the Court finds that it is appropriate to consolidate these three actions. The Court will not order consolidation as to the Cosby case.

         Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. The Motions to Consolidate filed in Gaynor [Doc. 62], Goldberg, [Doc. 62], Hull [Doc. 61] are GRANTED. Because it is the first-filed of the two cases, it is ORDERED that Gaynor v. Miller, 3:15-cv-545 SHALL SERVE as the lead case for purposes of this consolidation, and all future ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.